FUDforum: comp.lang.php » checking for audio playing ???

Home » Imported messages » comp.lang.php » checking for audio playing ???

Show: Today's Messages :: Polls :: Message Navigator

Re: cr [message #183630 is a reply to message #183567]

Sun, 03 November 2013 14:29

Thomas 'PointedEars'
Messages: 701
Registered: October 2010

Karma:

Senior Member

Richard Damon wrote:

> On 10/29/13, 7:18 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 10/28/13, 9:34 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>>> Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> > On 10/27/13, 10:22 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>>> >> Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> >>> […] The one thing that is fairly certain is that the
>>>> >>> player will almost certainly NOT be written in PHP,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> That much is true.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> as PHP is normally a server side language, and few clients will
>>>> >>> understand it.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> A common misconception. *No* programming language is “normally”
>>>> >> either “server-side” or “client-side”.
>>>> >
>>>> > Clearly a falsehood.
>>>>
>>>> [superseded]
>>>>
>>>> > I would expect that at least 95% of PHP executions
>>>> > are done via mod-php or php-cgi in response to a http request, [tl;dr]
>>>>
>>>> So even by your standards there are 5% left for “client-side”
>>>> applications.
>>>
>>> I consider 95% to be a reasonable definition for "normally". I will add
>>> that I normally ignore what you say because normally you are just
>>> spouting gibberish (as it seems here).
>>
>> Why do you reply to the canceled posting?
>>
> I suppose this shows your level of understanding of Usenet and the
> applicability of RFCs.

It rather shows that you are trolling since you are at least vaguely aware
how Cancel messages work, and what they mean, and not only reply regardless
but also deny their significance.

> Cancel messages are purely advisory,

Cancel messages are control messages. A news server may ignore them at own
risk. That does not make them “purely advisory”.

<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5536#section-3.2.3> pp.

> and routinely ignored by the backbone

There is no “backbone”; Usenet is explicitly decentralized. Each news
server administrator can set their own rules regarding to which messages to
accept from which peers, which to keep, and which to distribute to which
peers.

> because they are not authenticated.

Some news servers now require Cancel messages to be authenticated before
executed, that is, to match the lock-signature of the posting to be
canceled; others (like the one I am using since about 10 years) do not.

> It has been decades since one could expect a cancel to work.

Utter nonsense. That a Cancel message works was the general idea. It was
only after some people abused this feature that some servers decided to
ignore cancels or require authentication.

The Internet draft for lock-signing messages, and cancel messages to match
that signature, is a lot younger than that. And it has expired even though
it is implemented.

<http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_message>
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-usefor-cancel-lock-01>
<http://individual.net/faq.php#1.12>

So much for *your* “understanding of Usenet and the applicability of RFCs”.
It is also exemplified by the way you changed the Subject header field
value.

> Note, that your superseded message was injected to your server on
> USENET, it appears, just 2 minutes before I replied. […]

,----
| […]
| Message-ID: <1434655(dot)Yjjdx3QzlV(at)PointedEars(dot)de>
| From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars(at)web(dot)de>
| […]
| Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 14:34:58 +0100
| […]
| References: <1ia1p6efkuy6j(dot)ew455c20yr22$(dot)dlg(at)40tude(dot)net>
<l4jjv1$16b$2(at)dont-email(dot)me> <a4mqn9voa0zs$(dot)2gqi5acsdw6l$(dot)dlg(at)40tude(dot)net>
<P9dbu.14655$9X3(dot)6324(at)en-nntp-03(dot)dc1(dot)easynews(dot)com>
<4129338(dot)JVDsMHeclA(at)PointedEars(dot)de> <Yvsbu.14426$Lj7.6142@en-
nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com>
| […]
`----

That was 2013-10-28 13:34:58 UTC.

,----
| Message-ID: <9415386(dot)0xDGcqzFey(at)PointedEars(dot)de>
| From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars(at)web(dot)de>
| […]
| Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 14:37:03 +0100
| […]
| Supersedes: <1434655(dot)Yjjdx3QzlV(at)PointedEars(dot)de>
`----

That was 2013-10-28 13:37:03 UTC (about 2 minutes later). To be sure (not
all servers support “Supersedes” either), I sent the corresponding Cancel
message only seconds later.

,----
| […]
| From: Richard Damon <Richard(at)Damon-Family(dot)org>
| […]
| References: <1ia1p6efkuy6j(dot)ew455c20yr22$(dot)dlg(at)40tude(dot)net>
<l4jjv1$16b$2(at)dont-email(dot)me> <a4mqn9voa0zs$(dot)2gqi5acsdw6l$(dot)dlg(at)40tude(dot)net>
<P9dbu.14655$9X3(dot)6324(at)en-nntp-03(dot)dc1(dot)easynews(dot)com>
<4129338(dot)JVDsMHeclA(at)PointedEars(dot)de> <Yvsbu.14426$Lj7.6142@en-
nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com> <1434655(dot)Yjjdx3QzlV(at)PointedEars(dot)de>
| In-Reply-To: <1434655(dot)Yjjdx3QzlV(at)PointedEars(dot)de>
| […]
| Message-ID: <wcEbu.10265$UA3(dot)1277(at)en-nntp-08(dot)dc1(dot)easynews(dot)com>
| […]
| Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 21:29:53 -0400
| […]
`----

That was 2013-10-29 01:29:53 UTC, more than 10 hours later. I would pity
you for your slow 20th century newsfeed if it were so.

I will now leave you to your further “misconceptions”, lest you do not waste
more of my precious time. May you die in ignorance. *PLONK*

F'up2 poster

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		checking for audio playing ??? By: Mr Oldies on Sun, 27 October 2013 14:58
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Christoph Michael Bec on Sun, 27 October 2013 15:45
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Mr Oldies on Sun, 27 October 2013 16:01
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Denis McMahon on Sun, 27 October 2013 17:53
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Mr Oldies on Sun, 27 October 2013 18:24
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Doug Miller on Sun, 27 October 2013 18:38
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Richard Damon on Sun, 27 October 2013 18:43
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Thomas 'PointedEars' on Mon, 28 October 2013 02:22
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Jerry Stuckle on Mon, 28 October 2013 09:49
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Richard Damon on Mon, 28 October 2013 12:11
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Thomas 'PointedEars' on Mon, 28 October 2013 13:37
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Jerry Stuckle on Mon, 28 October 2013 14:01
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Arno Welzel on Tue, 29 October 2013 19:10
		server-side vs.client-side (was: checking for audio playing ???) By: Christoph Michael Bec on Tue, 29 October 2013 20:45
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Jerry Stuckle on Wed, 30 October 2013 00:54
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Christoph Michael Bec on Wed, 30 October 2013 02:18
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Jerry Stuckle on Wed, 30 October 2013 02:31
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Arno Welzel on Wed, 30 October 2013 08:20
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Christoph Michael Bec on Wed, 30 October 2013 18:04
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Jerry Stuckle on Wed, 30 October 2013 18:58
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Christoph Michael Bec on Wed, 30 October 2013 19:54
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Jerry Stuckle on Wed, 30 October 2013 20:21
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Christoph Michael Bec on Wed, 30 October 2013 20:55
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Jerry Stuckle on Wed, 30 October 2013 21:07
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Arno Welzel on Thu, 31 October 2013 08:40
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Christoph Michael Bec on Thu, 31 October 2013 22:03
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Jerry Stuckle on Fri, 01 November 2013 00:38
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Thomas 'PointedEars' on Sat, 02 November 2013 16:57
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Arno Welzel on Sat, 02 November 2013 18:36
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: The Natural Philosoph on Sat, 02 November 2013 18:44
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Denis McMahon on Sun, 03 November 2013 00:28
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Doug Miller on Sat, 02 November 2013 19:01
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Jerry Stuckle on Sun, 03 November 2013 01:40
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Michael Vilain on Fri, 01 November 2013 16:53
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Jerry Stuckle on Fri, 01 November 2013 17:53
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Tim Streater on Fri, 01 November 2013 21:10
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: The Natural Philosoph on Fri, 01 November 2013 22:25
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Tim Streater on Fri, 01 November 2013 22:29
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Jerry Stuckle on Sat, 02 November 2013 00:37
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Arno Welzel on Sat, 02 November 2013 00:26
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: The Natural Philosoph on Fri, 01 November 2013 18:37
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Stefan+Usenet on Fri, 01 November 2013 19:19
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Arno Welzel on Sat, 02 November 2013 00:24
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Thomas 'PointedEars' on Sat, 02 November 2013 16:46
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Richard Damon on Sat, 02 November 2013 19:41
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Tim Streater on Sat, 02 November 2013 21:37
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Arno Welzel on Sun, 03 November 2013 09:48
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Tim Streater on Sun, 03 November 2013 10:28
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Arno Welzel on Tue, 05 November 2013 10:15
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Tim Streater on Tue, 05 November 2013 12:47
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Thomas 'PointedEars' on Sun, 03 November 2013 13:16
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Tim Streater on Sun, 03 November 2013 16:00
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Chuck Anderson on Sun, 03 November 2013 21:52
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Chuck Anderson on Mon, 04 November 2013 06:19
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Tim Streater on Mon, 04 November 2013 18:02
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Arno Welzel on Wed, 30 October 2013 08:09
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Denis McMahon on Mon, 28 October 2013 15:23
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: The Natural Philosoph on Mon, 28 October 2013 16:56
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Doug Miller on Sun, 27 October 2013 18:22
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Beauregard T. Shagnas on Mon, 28 October 2013 13:49
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Scott Johnson on Mon, 28 October 2013 18:36
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Arno Welzel on Mon, 28 October 2013 19:02
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Richard Damon on Tue, 29 October 2013 01:29
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Thomas 'PointedEars' on Tue, 29 October 2013 11:18
		cr By: Richard Damon on Fri, 01 November 2013 03:21
		Re: cr By: Thomas 'PointedEars' on Sun, 03 November 2013 14:29
		Re: cr By: Jerry Stuckle on Sun, 03 November 2013 14:34
		Re: cr By: Richard Damon on Sun, 03 November 2013 20:18
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Arno Welzel on Tue, 29 October 2013 19:12
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Doug Miller on Tue, 29 October 2013 20:21

Previous Topic:	There is some confusion on my site I should clear up
Next Topic:	accessing nested unknown unserialized objects

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

]

Current Time: Sun Dec 01 10:17:06 GMT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.07198 seconds