Why is Everybody so clueless on the importance of Desktop Search to the Masses?



  • @spenk said:

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    @CodeSimian said:

    For the common man, however, indexing is VERY useful.

    No doubt about it. But Indexers do have their limits. Use SSDS in conjunction with your indexer if you must. We now know that your merged files won't be looked at (too big). And in this case they shouldn't be. Maybe even keep your secret info at the end of the big merge file. But a beginner should get to know SSDS first then picking up the rest will be easy. They will be confident in the fact that with Swamp search and their limited knowledge of search. They are still OK and way ahead of some in controling their video, pictures music text and lives. No doubt SSDS could use a few simple extractor apps. A good outlook email extract would make somebody one of my favorites.  

     

    Index based searchers make searching for files quick and easy and require no complex syntax, random mp3 and video files are done by the os supplied media player and require no learning time.

    SSDS requires odd syntax to do anything and would require the user to scrap their way of doing things and fit with your model of how things should be done - this isn't a good start for SSDS.

    If people want to keep information secret then they should encrypt (or cript) it - this isn't difficult either under windows and 3rd party tools can make it easier still (truedisk is an excellent example).

    Rather than extractor apps and requiring merges SSDS should be able to search the data in place - simple as that.

     @SpectateSwamp said:

    But why would you every want to index every book in a library on your PC isn't that OVERKILL? But SSDS could handle it. With a few MODS and backgrounder apps running extracts. those extracts being picked up by any dummy program even SSDS. The Great SSDS. Full context. High Speed Desktop Search for libraries. Somebody should do it.

    Because I have a lot of technical and reference manualsin pdf format I find being able to search them usefule, sometimes I need to dig up information on a term and not be aware of all the pdfs that are relevant - WDS works fine in locating all the documents. You are now saying SSDS could handle this if it was changed to behave in a different way, backgrounder apps and running extracts do not exist in ssds currently.

     

    Technical variations in the manufactured software paradigm do not bestow upon the canthian user an indication of greater timekeeping nor do they embody the notion of indexing as a means to achieving context. However the randomization of design space in achillean terms means that SSDS would in theory respond with a much greater latent ethnocentric drive from the perspective of the designer.

    From this is inferred the notion of backgrounder apps within ideology being for use as, like WDS, an enabler toward the direction of search space in a power user environment. Withdrawn from conscious however is the unworking implementation; in a very real and corporeal sense this is held only in the value system of the willing user, and not, as archimedes would put it, a network locale manifestation of open cognition manualisation enabling provision to valuize. This is a critique of common design pattern space with only minimal scope for validity in the user base.

    Data stored long term in huge files may be prone to empowerment disclosure, where the indexer may concatenate in cognition space while the merger performs the counterpart as a mechanistic opposition to this overture. On closer inspection implementation and design ideology meet headlong and the viewers perspective is directed to the domain of the browser. This does not pose a problem for the developer since, while the metaphor is shifted tangentially from the original user space, the power user remains enabled by the balanced coordination of true design transition.

    I use to use altavita but now i use google because its reet nice like.



  • Spectate Swamp Desktop Search is flawed.

    As I see it, there are three key problems with SSDS.

    1. It doesn't help you find files. In order to use SSDS, you first have to use a different Desktop Search to find all your files, so you can merge them.
    2. It doesn't let you edit files following a search. As you're searching a merged copy, rather than your original files, there's no way to edit the originals without finding and opening them manually first.
    3. It is slow, resource-hungry, buggy, non-portable, has an obscure interface and requires large amounts of manual set-up before being used.

     

    Three issues. To put this in context, it's like a buying a bicyle that:

    1. Doesn't help you to travel anywhere.
    2. Doesn't let you steer.
    3. Has square wheels, a rusted chain, faulty brakes, weighs half a ton, has pedals attached to the handlebars and is in pieces and on fire.

    By contrast, Google Desktop Search is a bicycle that's actually a teleporter which gives you money and blowjobs. I know which I'd rather use...

     



  • The Zen of SwampTroll

    Before the main thrust, as it were, first a quick plea to SS. Please stop the 'Greppler' business. It's annoying and insulting to the intelligence to hear this from a grown man who doesn't even know what a bloody regular expression is. Have you ever used grep? No, not VAX Search - I said grep. Well - have you?

    (While we're at it, and although I said nothing at the time, if you ever called me 'BennieSwamp' to my face, I'd lamp you. And I'm a hippie...)

    Now, for everybody else - the ones that can parse English sentences with more than a single clause, that is. I'm sure I'm not alone in trying to work out what it is about this thread that's so compulsive, other than the car-crash fascination of watching a psychotic in full flow, and having just spent a morning showing non-techie-types some basic stuff about MS Word without resorting to screaming "Just Press F1" at them, I think I've sussed some of it.

    As programmers, and thus generalised problem-solvers on the whole, we're good at analysing a situation and breaking it down into its constituent parts. I'm sure most of us here are also the ones that friends / colleagues come to when they need complicated concepts explaining - even if we know bugger all about it, we're often good at simplifying for others. :)

    With Doug, we appear to have hit a wall, and it's become almost a matter of pride to see who can be first to explain something that seems so obvious to us in a language that the man understands. Personally, it annoys the hell out of me that I can't just make him see in 3 sentences or less! Part of it of course is the medium - he can pick-and-choose as he likes, ignoring the questions that may shake his convictions, whilst picking up on throwaway sarcasm and treating it as verification. Even so, we've got to admit at some point that like any good koan, this is simply insoluble.

    The main clue in all this is the code. Anybody still tying to explain basic concepts to this man who hasn't had a look at the source yet should do so now. You know how when you look at "The Fairy Feller's Master Stroke", which although a work of genius, is so obviously done by a psychotic? Take away the "work of genius" bit, and you've got it. It contains every single possible class of WTF ever featured on this site. It's what would have happened if Paula had been allowed to continue for 20 years. My very first post here was an attempt to explain to SS about the quality of code reflecting the quality of thinking - and at that point I'd only scanned the first 100 lines or so. Having looked at the rest now, I can only conclude that there really is no hope. We will never be able to explain anything to this man. Ever. Let's simply accept the peace of mind that brings :)



  • @Benn said:

    As programmers, and thus generalised problem-solvers on the whole, we're good at analysing a situation and breaking it down into its constituent parts. I'm sure most of us here are also the ones that friends / colleagues come to when they need complicated concepts explaining - even if we know bugger all about it, we're often good at simplifying for others. :)

    With Doug, we appear to have hit a wall, and it's become almost a matter of pride to see who can be first to explain something that seems so obvious to us in a language that the man understands. Personally, it annoys the hell out of me that I can't just make him see in 3 sentences or less! Part of it of course is the medium - he can pick-and-choose as he likes, ignoring the questions that may shake his convictions, whilst picking up on throwaway sarcasm and treating it as verification. Even so, we've got to admit at some point that like any good koan, this is simply insoluble.

    Insightful.  To be honest, I'm starting to find this thread to be more of an ordeal than anything else.  Judging from the tone of some of the replies, I wouldn't be surprised if there were other people who felt the same way.  In recognition of this, and because we've already built a mountain of evidence demonstrating how slow, buggy, and useless SSDS is in case Doug ever decides to help himself, I propose that we deal with future SpectateSwamp posts in one of two ways:

    • Ignoring them completely.
    • Responding with utter, utter gibberish.

    Example:

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    It would be easy to pass exe and dll info ie paths to the clipboard. But the masses have no need for that and I'm with the masses and Grepplers.

    I'm trying to unload the program so I don't feel guilty for not working on it. There isn't a program that can't be improved. INcluding this Great Great Swamp Search.

    "The doctor said the aneurysm has to come out by Tuesday.  The life of a haberdasher is a cruel road."

    Of course, this will only work if everyone gives up on him.  As long as there's something lucid for him to latch onto and eat away at, he's never going to leave...



  • Threat to Google

     Am I the only one who fears that the sheer size of this thread will bring down Google world-wide eventually? And we'll be left with nothing but SwampSearch?

    Could this be what SwampSwampie is trying to achieve and we are all contributing unknowingly? 



  • @fist-poster said:

     Am I the only one who fears that the sheer size of this thread will bring down Google world-wide eventually?
     

    I think Google can afford the space required to expand their index by the 37 pages comprising this thread so far... Question is, can the planet afford the extra heat generated by Swampy's computer has he struggles to keep up with merging all the new posts every day.

    Perhaps some good will come of this. We can use Swampy's heavy append/merge activities to find out if magnetic media does have a limit to how many times it can be changed.

    @fist-poster said:

    Could this be what SwampSwampie is trying to achieve and we are all contributing unknowingly? 

    Swampy would have to achieve consciousness before being able to come up with such a dastardly plan. So far there's no evidence that SSDS is anything but a "modernized" version of the old Eliza program:

     

    User: I'd love it if I could search my files.
    Swampy: So you would like to search.
    User: Yes!
    Swampy: Please tell me more
    User: Not knowing where my data is makes me feel blue
    Swampy: So you feel blue. Have you tried changing Cmd(245623423522343) in control$^2425243456234r.txt to 'pqr' so the output is blue?



  • Real Speed comes at the KeyBoard

    @fist-poster said:

     Am I the only one who fears that the sheer size of this thread will bring down Google world-wide eventually? And we'll be left with nothing but SwampSearch?

    Could this be what SwampSwampie is trying to achieve and we are all contributing unknowingly? 

    GDS YDS  MDS CDS all the DS's of the world should be Shaking because of Backgrounder and other features that Indexers just can't Touch. And Yes you are all helping. Could you imagine ME writing all this Knowledge into a file and trying to get anybody to read it. IMPOSSIBLE.

    MPSwamp doesn't want his demo. So I'll demo another feature a hands free one so the video will be very good. A while back I did screen captures of sites I visited and some of the mail messages I sent. Doing screen captures right before the send. All the front page jpgs had a Ctrl/A (Select all) Ctrl/C (Copy) then a paste of the text into the sites.txt file (Prompt #2 option 'z') Nearly 400 of these sites. I'll get the jpgs up and displaying randomly as a screen saver and at the same time run a random search for a "word" of my choosing. Other apps can do 15 things. 15 SSDS's can do 1 thing each. This video is going to be easy.

     

    Oh Yeah. I want you all to be my Valentine



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    the world should be Shaking because of Backgrounder
     

    Perhaps you should put something in SSDS that runs in the 'background' then. You application uses one thread. And it locks up solid when dealing with large files. The video has been posted many times before, we have all seen it.

    You should actually learn about threads before you keep saying you use them. But I know you wont, because it is easier to vomit random crap into the forum editor.

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    Other apps can do 15 things. 15 SSDS's can do 1 thing each.

    Oh my god, I am laughing so much I am crying...



  • @Benn said:

    The main clue in all this is the code. Anybody still tying to explain basic concepts to this man who hasn't had a look at the source yet should do so now.
     

    I've spent a little time skimming the code.  Here's all you need to know about it:

     

    line_12500:
        s1len = Len(SSS1)
        s2len = Len(SSS2)
        s3len = Len(SSS3)
        s4len = Len(SSS4)    '23 june 2002
        s5len = Len(SSS5)
        s6len = Len(SSS6)
    


  • BennSwamp checks the source

    @bstorer said:

    @Benn said:

    The main clue in all this is the code. Anybody still tying to explain basic concepts to this man who hasn't had a look at the source yet should do so now.
     

    I've spent a little time skimming the code.  Here's all you need to know about it:

     

    line_12500:
        s1len = Len(SSS1)
        s2len = Len(SSS2)
        s3len = Len(SSS3)
        s4len = Len(SSS4)    '23 june 2002
        s5len = Len(SSS5)
        s6len = Len(SSS6)
    

    I'm way behind on my replies. Done to end of page 35 and had to skip ahead for a bit. Before the 23 June 2002 SSDS had only 3 search keys. There was a lot of changes required to add the next 3. Cut and paste all over the place with 23 june 2002. So if a Swampie wants to make it 9 or 12 keys. Follow these crumbs. I'm glad you are looking. Search the code while you testing a copy of Swamp search.  One other DS point. Desktop Search is a never ending topic. I have visited forums with various discussions that have been CLOSED for years. Discussion closed - Discussion closed. What the hey are they gee-hawing us or what. As this thread is never ending. I need some swampies that can do the educating here.

    Being a moron means I can spell words any way I like. No spelling mistakes. Just reading mistakes.

     



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    GDS YDS  MDS CDS all the DS's of the world should be Shaking because of Backgrounder

    First of all, I'm not sure why "Shaking" is capitalized.  Should these programs all move to Sabbathday Lake, Maine?  Or should they just wait for the time being, as Backgrounder does not exist?

    and other features that Indexers just can't Touch.

    Can't, won't, let's not quibble over small details.

    And Yes you are all helping.

    If we're helping, I'd hate to see hurting.

    Could you imagine ME writing all this Knowledge

    No.  You have no knowledge.

    into a file and trying to get anybody to read it. IMPOSSIBLE.

    Maybe we should just start adding random, false "knowledge" to this thread.  A peanut is both a pea and a nut.  The moon is made of cheese.  The first President of the United States was Batman, and his Vice President was not Robin, but Alfred, his butler.

    MPSwamp doesn't want his demo.

    He has an odd way of showing it, what with his repeated demands to see it.

    So I'll demo another feature a hands free one so the video will be very good. A while back I did screen captures of sites I visited and some of the mail messages I sent. Doing screen captures right before the send.

    That sounds like it was a worthwhile use of one's time.

    All the front page jpgs had a Ctrl/A (Select all) Ctrl/C (Copy) then a paste of the text into the sites.txt file (Prompt #2 option 'z') Nearly 400 of these sites. I'll get the jpgs up and displaying randomly as a screen saver and at the same time run a random search for a "word" of my choosing.

    Yeah, that sounds worthwhile, too.

    Other apps can do 15 things. 15 SSDS's can do 1 thing each. This video is going to be easy.

     I don't even need to point out how stupid this is, do I?  Even you should be able to see why this is moronic.  I have a calculator here on my desk, it's a graphing calculator, granted, but it's still just a stupid calculator.  Even it realizes how stupid this is.  And it doesn't even know the first thing about searching desktops.

    Oh Yeah. I want you all to be my Valentine

    I want someone to take your computer away and lock you in a cage far from any electronics or people.  We all have our dreams. 



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    Cut and paste all over the place with 23 june 2002.
     

    You don't even understand why this is funny to the rest of us, do you? 



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    Or maybe got clued in about Desktop Search enough to give Swamp search a try for a few days maybe..
    But I did. And it froze.



  • @bstorer said:

    @Benn said:

    The main clue in all this is the code. Anybody still tying to explain basic concepts to this man who hasn't had a look at the source yet should do so now.
     

    I've spent a little time skimming the code.  Here's all you need to know about it:

     

    line_12500:
        s1len = Len(SSS1)
        s2len = Len(SSS2)
        s3len = Len(SSS3)
        s4len = Len(SSS4)    '23 june 2002
        s5len = Len(SSS5)
        s6len = Len(SSS6)
    

     

    Wait, does this explain this quote:

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    Why limit the search criteria to six? It was 3 at one time. That was just too few. I seldom seldon
    need 6 search items. It works for me. Extend it if you like?

    (Quote brought to you by Google) 

    So 23rd of June, 2002 was the memorable day that SSDS became twice as powerful? And this dude hasn't even heard of arrays? 



  • Alright Swamp I just finished the project I was working on. I am ready to take on SSDS if you still need help. My normal rates and fees apply. How will you be paying for this?



  • @fist-poster said:

    So 23rd of June, 2002 was the memorable day that SSDS became twice as powerful? And this dude hasn't even heard of arrays? 

     

    Sadly enough, he has:

        Private array_ooo(55) As String 'january 18 2001
        Private array_aaa(55) As String 'january 18 2001

    Also, compare that with these lines, which are separated from the above by a single line:

        Private array_pos As Integer    'january 18 2001
        Private array_prt As Integer    'january 18 2001 

    My best guess is that he actually forgot about them.



  • SpectateSwamp,

    I have another challenge for you.  The terms and conditions are very clear.

    I will write an open source (public domain) flatfile search utility, in VB6.  It will scan to the end of a 100,000,000 randomly filled byte file, of which the last 7 bytes have been replaced with "Swampy!".  I would like to see SSDS do the same, with a separate (but functionally similar) 100,000,000 randomly filled byte file with the last 7 characters being "insta!!".  If SSDS outperforms my search, I will personally show SSDS to five people at my work.  If my search outperforms SSDS, then you will compete in the desktop showdown that Master Plan Software laid out earlier.

    Either way, you are welcome to replace some of the file-scanning code with my own, as it will be public domain.  If you are game, let me know and I'll begin coding.

     I will go as far as mailing you a DVD of the exact data he wants you to search through, as I can understand dialup / some DSL is slow.



  • @insta said:

    SpectateSwamp,

    I have another challenge for you.  The terms and conditions are very clear.

    I will write an open source (public domain) flatfile search utility, in VB6.  It will scan to the end of a 100,000,000 randomly filled byte file, of which the last 7 bytes have been replaced with "Swampy!".  I would like to see SSDS do the same, with a separate (but functionally similar) 100,000,000 randomly filled byte file with the last 7 characters being "insta!!".  If SSDS outperforms my search, I will personally show SSDS to five people at my work.  If my search outperforms SSDS, then you will compete in the desktop showdown that Master Plan Software laid out earlier.

    Either way, you are welcome to replace some of the file-scanning code with my own, as it will be public domain.  If you are game, let me know and I'll begin coding.

     I will go as far as mailing you a DVD of the exact data he wants you to search through, as I can understand dialup / some DSL is slow.

     

    Since we already know the interesting thing is at the end of the file (and we know that all interesting and sensitive data is at the end of large files) where's the point? 



  • @fist-poster said:

    @insta said:

    SpectateSwamp,

    I have another challenge for you.  The terms and conditions are very clear.

    I will write an open source (public domain) flatfile search utility, in VB6.  It will scan to the end of a 100,000,000 randomly filled byte file, of which the last 7 bytes have been replaced with "Swampy!".  I would like to see SSDS do the same, with a separate (but functionally similar) 100,000,000 randomly filled byte file with the last 7 characters being "insta!!".  If SSDS outperforms my search, I will personally show SSDS to five people at my work.  If my search outperforms SSDS, then you will compete in the desktop showdown that Master Plan Software laid out earlier.

    Either way, you are welcome to replace some of the file-scanning code with my own, as it will be public domain.  If you are game, let me know and I'll begin coding.

     I will go as far as mailing you a DVD of the exact data he wants you to search through, as I can understand dialup / some DSL is slow.

     

    Since we already know the interesting thing is at the end of the file (and we know that all interesting and sensitive data is at the end of large files) where's the point? 

     

    I submit my entry... it is called tail.



  • I know I'm a bit late on the thrashing the codebase front, but hopefully I can make up for it:

    I seem to remember somebody suggesting that all the gotos in the SSDS codebase should be graphed.  Ten minutes of coding later, and a quick download of the abomination that is source.txt, and I have created the following graph:

    SSDS Goto Graph

    Line numbers are plotted from top to bottom, with goto statements on the left linked to labels on the right by colored lines.  Blue lines indicate a goto to a later line (not quite as bad), and red lines indicate a goto links to an earlier line (spagettier).  The black bars on the left and right of the graph indicate the relative density of the gotos and labels, respectively.  The line numbers are also labeled on the far right hand side, in multiples of 200.  I had initially hoped to graph everything with a 1:1 line-to-pixel ratio, and then I realized that there are over 10,000 lines of code in this monstrosity :P



  • @Albatross said:

    I seem to remember somebody suggesting that all the gotos in the SSDS codebase should be graphed. 
     

    You are only encouraging him:

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    GoTo and shitty, Try and make major changes to programs that arn't spaghetti. If it is well designed a well placed GoTo can do Magic.



  • @CodeSimian said:

    @SpectateSwamp said:
    GoTo and shitty, Try and make major changes to programs that arn't spaghetti. If it is well designed a well placed GoTo can do Magic.
     

    I like how Spectate says well designed, when there are things like this in the code:

    'then the text is written and re-written over that image??? langaliers where are you

    And other masterpieces that have been pointed out over and over again.

     



  • @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    I like how Spectate says well designed, when there are things like this in the code:

    'then the text is written and re-written over that image??? langaliers where are you

    And other masterpieces that have been pointed out over and over again.

    More importantly, WTF does any of that have to do with The Langoliers?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Langoliers 



  • @CodeSimian said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    I like how Spectate says well designed, when there are things like this in the code:

    'then the text is written and re-written over that image??? langaliers where are you

    And other masterpieces that have been pointed out over and over again.

    More importantly, WTF does any of that have to do with The Langoliers? 

     

    I have no idea, but I think reading the comments in that code is about the closest look you will get into a mind as sick as his.



  • @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    I have no idea, but I think reading the comments in that code is about the closest look you will get into a mind as sick as his.
     

    No thanks, this thread alone is already seriously taxing my sanity. 

    OMG! That must be his evil, secret plan.  Once everyone here has gone stark, raving mad, he'll swoop in and recruit us into his army of Swampies.

    Or has that already happened? 



  • I believe SpectateSwamp is the evil half-twin (same father, different species mother) of Milton from Office Space.



  •  @Balthazaar said:

    I believe SpectateSwamp is the evil half-twin (same father, different species mother) of Milton from Office Space.

    Haha. I love it. Beautiful.



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    GDS YDS  MDS CDS all the DS's of the world should be Shaking because of Backgrounder and other features that Indexers just can't Touch. And Yes you are all helping.
     

    You mean wonderful features such as 'not searching for files'? I really hope I'm not helping - I'm still trying to get you to either accept a challenge or explain in simple terms how to merge my source code....

    I don't even know what 

     @SpectateSwamp said:

    Could you imagine ME writing all this Knowledge into a file and trying to get anybody to read it. IMPOSSIBLE

    even means.

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    MPSwamp doesn't want his demo. So I'll demo another feature a hands free one so the video will be very good. A while back I did screen captures of sites I visited and some of the mail messages I sent. Doing screen captures right before the send. All the front page jpgs had a Ctrl/A (Select all) Ctrl/C (Copy) then a paste of the text into the sites.txt file (Prompt #2 option 'z') Nearly 400 of these sites. I'll get the jpgs up and displaying randomly as a screen saver and at the same time run a random search for a "word" of my choosing.

    What does this mean? re you really doing screen captures of web sites and then manually indexing them in a sites.txt file? Or are you pasting the text of the pages into sites.txt? 

      @SpectateSwamp said:

    Other apps can do 15 things. 15 SSDS's can do 1 thing each. This video is going to be easy.

    You are using words but no meaning is associated with them... Other applications can do few or many things - it depends on the app and it's intended functionality. 15 SSDSs though can still do toss all of interest to me, could any of the 15 even search for a file?

     

     



  • @Albatross said:

    Ten minutes of coding later, and a quick download of the abomination that is source.txt, and I have created the following graph:

    I bow for you sir!





  • @tombom said:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SpectateSwamp
     

    My favorite line:

    To make this app a NET search, or create Linux, Mac and C versions should be quite simple. There are just 10,000 lines of Visual Basic 5 code, with lots of comments and deactivated testing lines. A URL would be loaded instead of a picture.

    Brilliant!



  • @tombom said:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SpectateSwamp
     

    http://wiki.elearning.ubc.ca/DigitalDivideandLiteracy?show_comments=1

    A university wiki? Really? Is there any site Spectate will not spam?  If the Holy Bible (or Bill of Rights, or Magna Carta, or Declaration of Independence, or <insert you favourite sacred document here>) were a wiki, Swamp would be all over it.

    Or how about the one where Swamp attempts to revive a 2-year old thread on search engines? Hilarity does not ensue.

    http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=51845 

     



  •  This one is even better:

    http://www.daniweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74992

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    Reason #1 for editing video. There are 30,000+ laws in my province.

    You won't be videoing long before you catch someone, doing something
    illegal. Editing those out can save a lot of hassle. The laws make
    almost everything illegal; from seat-belts to rolling stops. Resulting
    in some very good video, that will never be shown.

     

    http://www.daniweb.com/forums/thread74992-2.html

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    Originally Posted by joeprogrammer View Post
    I find this thread amusing because just a little while ago you were saying why it's completely unnecessary to edit video. Hmm?

    It's not really editing. Just using an editor. My custom player does
    a reasonable job of slowing down the action. But I must agree that
    editors do have a purpose in "better viewing of digital artifacts"

    So technically I'm still not editing. Just viewing the detail with one.

    I have yapped so much about not editing. That it came back to bite
    me. That kind of stuff happens to people all the time.

     



  • You shouldn't be surprised, he contradicts himself constantly. That is how I can be 100% sure he is full of shit.

    Just read through any of his longer thread (here, channel 9, etc) you will see it happen constantly.



  • @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    You shouldn't be surprised, he contradicts himself constantly. That is how I can be 100% sure he is full of shit.

    Just read through any of his longer thread (here, channel 9, etc) you will see it happen constantly.

     

    Oh, I'm not surprised.  It's just so...freakin...funny.  The stupidest part is he seems to think he has won some small personal battle every time he says something that makes people scratch their heads and go WTF!???



  • @CodeSimian said:

    Oh, I'm not surprised.  It's just so...freakin...funny.  The stupidest part is he seems to think he has won some small personal battle every time he says something that make people scratch their heads and go WTF!???
     

    Yep. And I truly believe that he thinks is making some kind of progress here. I even believe that HE believes he actually has users out there.

    That 700 users number is probably his hit counter on his website, and it is all just people coming to laugh at him. You know he is also the laughing stock of Whitecourt as well... No one there wants to really tell him to go away, only because he bears a resemblance to someone who might blow up city hall.



  • @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    You know he is also the laughing stock of Whitecourt as well... No one there wants to really tell him to go away, only because he bears a resemblance to someone who might blow up city hall.
     

    I am still afraid to ask him what happened in '86 (when "they stopped laughing"). 



  • It's Quiet... Too Quiet

    It's been over seven hours since his last post.  What happened, did someone unplug him?



  • @CodeSimian said:

    I am still afraid to ask him what happened in '86 (when "they stopped laughing"). 
     

    Let's just say there is a gap in generations, and his trailer is furnished with a lot of 'leathery' lamp shades.



  • @bstorer said:

    It's been over seven hours since his last post.  What happened, did someone unplug him?
     

    This usually happens when he is out 'walking the dogs by the creek'.

    My theory is he uses the time to stalk (hunt) children.



  • From the same thread on "video editing == cutting crime":

    http://www.daniweb.com/forums/post349527-9.html 

    @SpectateSwamp said:

     

    Strange strange video artifacts. Who's capturing them?

      #9  
    Apr 20th, 2007
    I have a couple more tips to add to my
    Nature and Digital Video tips list.
    Check the following clips out first.

    http://video.google.ca/videoplay?doc...50167775261588

    http://video.google.ca/videoplay?doc...48387537557028

    You can download the originals and take a more serious look if
    you have video editing software. Somebody out there should be
    able to explain this stuff away. Can't they. Anyway the tips are:
    How to capture video artifacts of your own. Sorta like a strange art
    Shoot clouds and sky with the sun at your back. Like in the video.
    If you have a bird put it in the video. You'll capture more of them.
    Because the birds seem to have the ability to see them too.

     

    I like the way he redefines "editing" from "excising footage of criminal behaviour" to "viewing 'digital artifacts' up close" in the SAME THREAD.  It's interesting that he apparently thinks birds can see video artifacts.  (WTF?)



  • @CodeSimian said:

    I like the way he redefines "editing" from "excising footage of criminal behaviour" to "viewing 'digital artifacts' up close" in the SAME THREAD.
     

    Yeah but look at the way he has continually redefined Desktop Search, indexing, etc in this thread.



  • A sample conversation with SpectateSwamp

     

    Swamp: You should edit video. To remove incriminating footage. 

    Forum Member #1: ??? Why are you telling us this?  This isn't even a video forum.

    Swamp: Whitecourt.  Political plants.  Rodney King. 

    Swamp: More tips on video: Use an editor. To view video artifacts up close.  It really helps. If you have a bird in the video.

    Forum Member #2: Didn't you tell us not to edit video last week?

    Swamp: It's not editing.  Just using an editor.  Have to say that editors are good for viewing digital artifacts up close.

     

    Maybe Swamp has ADD? Except his problem is so acute he cannot remember what he was saying 5 minutes ago.



  • @tombom said:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SpectateSwamp

    Now the critical question of etiquette: (mouse pointer hovering above the Delete tab) Do I delete this under CSD G11... um, this isn't "blatant spam" except in maybe the most strict sense of the definition (whatever this is, it probably just causes pain). Should it just be blanked? Should I subject Swampy to the full pain and glory of MfD? *sigh*

    I'm soft and pragmatic, so I just blanked the page and templated the guy. The original content is still in the talk page history. I hope a nastier admin doesn't walk this way =)



  • I know damn well where the text is, the whole point of the exercise is to see if Joe Q Random on TDWTF forums can write a faster sequential file search.  I'm trying to find something tangible that we can compete against him on.  Of course the search giants are all in cahoots with Microsoft so Windows will make their lookups faster, but VB6 vs VB6 should be pretty clear cut, no?



  • @insta said:

    I know damn well where the text is, the whole point of the exercise is to see if Joe Q Random on TDWTF forums can write a faster sequential file search.  I'm trying to find something tangible that we can compete against him on.  Of course the search giants are all in cahoots with Microsoft so Windows will make their lookups faster, but VB6 vs VB6 should be pretty clear cut, no?

     

    Except you will never be able to "prove" to Spectate that any tool is better than the all-powerful SSDS.  The closest you could ever get would be to re-write SSDS, with all of its "features" 100% intact.  And that would kind of defeat the purpose.



  • @insta said:

    VB6 vs VB6 should be pretty clear cut, no?
     

    VB5.



  • @CodeSimian said:

    If the Holy Bible (or Bill of Rights, or Magna Carta, or Declaration of Independence, or <insert you favourite sacred document here>) were a wiki, Swamp would be all over it.

    Erm... they are...

    But fear not! Verily, if thou shalt see the Man of Swamp defacing the Scriptures, and causing damage of unprecedented magnitude, fear no evil, for I'm sure there is someone thou canst contact. For even if I shall trudge through the valley of drudgiest spam, I fear no evil, for Jimbo is with me; the Undo button and the User Talk tab and the Block User button they comfort me.



  • @insta said:

    I know damn well where the text is, the whole point of the exercise is to see if Joe Q Random on TDWTF forums can write a faster sequential file search.  I'm trying to find something tangible that we can compete against him on.  Of course the search giants are all in cahoots with Microsoft so Windows will make their lookups faster, but VB6 vs VB6 should be pretty clear cut, no?

    Unfortunately, the dialog will probably go as follows:

    insta: Hey, Swampy, I made this über-cool linear search app, and it searches 3 times faster than SSDS, check it out!
    SpectateSwamp: You poor sob. It doesn't. Random Video .Video PlayBack is fun. I can videoin the YellowHead meetings like on a vax.
    insta: <Huh? Typity typity typity> OK, it does random video now.
    SpectateSwamp: Spectate Search shows scrolling text. Fun. You CONTROL your DATA. Just enter enter enter and you last page and press ql.
    insta: <WTF? Typity typity typity> Fine, now it does scrolling text too.
    SpectateSwamp: You don't know horseshit. Geeky grepplers. I challenge. DesktopSearch makes it simple. InstaSearch not simple. Not massy enough.
    insta: <? Typity typity typity> Now, my search looks and behaves exactly as yours, but actually works.
    SpectateSwamp: Don't undersatnd. What [i]Masses[/i] need. A visit to Swamp Shack required. Day or two. Then type gf at prompt 6 quantumleap and schnapps. Context. Not willi-nilly indexers. Welcome InstaSwamp.
    insta: THAT DOES NOT EVEN MAKE SENSE YOU RETARD
    SpectateSwamp: <ignores>
    insta: <face'o'table>

    The game is unfair. The only way to win is not to play.

    And, IIRC, Swampy did his abomination in VB5, not 6.



  • @Spectre said:

    insta: THAT DOES NOT EVEN MAKE SENSE YOU RETARD
     

    I am getting a good laugh at how that has become a staple of this thread.


Log in to reply