Darwin Awards 2006

APH

Check out this page:

http://darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin2006.html

I'm specifically impressed by the first entry's ranking (on the 1 - 10 scale): Stubbed Out 1.07933081489478e+15.0 (9265 votes)

plazmo

You can rate entrys over 10 just by changing the values in the rating form radio buttons.

rbowes

@plazmo said:

You can rate entrys over 10 just by changing the values in the rating form radio buttons.

They also check the referer, so you have to fake that, too.

But even faking the referer, even though it told me that my vote of 999999... was counted, it didn't change the rating. Perhaps they've fixed this?

fly2

@rbowes said:

They also check the referer, so you have to fake that, too

Or you can just use Firefox with the Web Developer Extension and use the 'Edit Html' function

Pap

Maybe the ratings on that other page don't update in real-time.

When I go to this page and then click "Vote on this Darwin Award" without selecting anything it gives me the average. I MAY have voted it up a little :)

(In case the average actually manages to change)

Pap

@fly2 said:

@rbowes said:
They also check the referer, so you have to fake that, too

Or you can just use Firefox with the Web Developer Extension and use the 'Edit Html' function

Or you can just use Opera and click View Source without installing any stupid extensions.

bobday

erm... how will viewing source allow you to fake the referer?

wadec

... and thereby do something entirely different ...

Pap

@bobday said:

erm... how will viewing source allow you to fake the referer?

Because the referer never changes. You're editing the page as on your local cache, but it's still linked to the original remote document, so the appropriate referer is sent.

Pap

@bobday said:

erm... how will viewing source allow you to fake the referer?

Because the referer never changes. You're editing the page as on your local cache, but it's still linked to the original remote document, so the appropriate referer is sent.

kirchhoff

Does it still work (view source with intent to edit I mean) if they use javascript and document.write to create the HTML, like using an obfuscator?

Pap

Not with the View Source method, but it also comes with a developer console that you can use to manipulate the DOM and headers and such. I don't know for a fact that it will edit dynamic content like that, but at first glance it seems like it would.

Fred_Foobar

@Pap said:

@fly2 said:
@rbowes said:
They also check the referer, so you have to fake that, too

Or you can just use Firefox with the Web Developer Extension and use the 'Edit Html' function

Or you can just use Opera and click View Source without installing any stupid extensions.

Or you can use Firebug, and use the HTML tree view to change the generated source, if there is any.

Fred_Foobar

Thanks for Voting!

We recorded your vote of 999999999 for:
Stubbed Out
Average Score: 967322369235742 / 10 (9303 Votes)

HeroreV

@Pap said:

Or you can just use Opera and click View Source without installing any stupid extensions.

Or you can use DOM Inspector, which comes with Firefox. That way you can click the element to select it, instead of having to search through a bunch of text. And of course both Firefox and DOM Inspector are open source, while Opera is not.

But I already have the "stupid" Firebug extension, and it makes this extremely easy, so I just used it.

bobday

The real WTF is that they bother to render it as 1.07933081489478e+15.0 when 1079330814894780 is shorter, and (as someone who never listened in maths) easier to comprehend how dumb the subject cadaver was.

Otterdam

@Pap said:

Or you can just use Opera and click View Source without installing any stupid extensions.

I know it's irrational, but the only thing stopping me from downloading Opera is the irritating-as-hell fanboys. So your browser is slightly more efficient and almost equivalent to having a fixed number of Firefox extensions built in, well, aren't you special? (grrrrr)