better stop bad-mouthing bush online

Post by **tnf** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 1:49 am

Kracus wrote:
tnf wrote:Remember GKY posting about how you could send two emails to yourself (like from gmail to hotmail) and in the first email put the words "Bush" and "bomb" and maybe "whitehouse" in the subject and none of that in the second, and see that the first email gets there way behind the second one?
I remember that. did you test it? I was under the assumption it was complete bullshit.

it actually worked for me.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 1:51 am

Hmmm strange. Think they just read this thread?

Post by **Scourge** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 1:52 am

Probably.

Post by **R00k** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 2:16 am

What's scary is that they're using this kiddy porn court case as a ridiculous justification to force Google to turn over data.

It was ruled that Google didn't have to turn over any information on what people's searches were (which is what they were going for), but Google has to give them the URLs of thousands of sites that Google indexes.

Now why would they need this information to - as they claim - prove that Google can be used to bypass adult content filtering software? That was their whole justification, when proving something like that can be done simply by sitting in front of a computer and running random searches.

I simply don't like the idea of this administration demanding access to data showing what sites Google indexes. It seems pretty creepy to me.

Post by **Eraser** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 7:33 am

tnf wrote:Remember GKY posting about how you could send two emails to yourself (like from gmail to hotmail) and in the first email put the words "Bush" and "bomb" and maybe "whitehouse" in the subject and none of that in the second, and see that the first email gets there way behind the second one?

Yeah but that's urban legend. If it worked for you, it's pure coincidence.

Post by **Eraser** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 7:34 am

R00k wrote:What's scary is that they're using this kiddy porn court case as a ridiculous justification to force Google to turn over data.

It was ruled that Google didn't have to turn over any information on what people's searches were (which is what they were going for), but Google has to give them the URLs of thousands of sites that Google indexes.

Now why would they need this information to - as they claim - prove that Google can be used to bypass adult content filtering software? That was their whole justification, when proving something like that can be done simply by sitting in front of a computer and running random searches.

I simply don't like the idea of this administration demanding access to data showing what sites Google indexes. It seems pretty creepy to me.

Yeah that's creepy, but it's great to see that Google won the case and didn't have to hand over search terms. They do indeed have to give 50.000 URLs but I don't care about that.

Post by **Fender** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 1:25 pm

If Bush was shot, who here would throw a party? I know I would. I'd invite everyone I knew and get a keg. The King is dead, long live the King!

Post by **Freakaloin** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 2:17 pm

Kracus wrote:Hmmm strange. Think they just read this thread?

yeah...and now they are looking into all of our net usage since 2000...busted?...

Post by **seremtan** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 3:49 pm

which in your case is all the daytime TV you've warezed via usenet

Post by **DooMer** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 4:43 pm

I'm sending your IP's to the NSA. Scared?

Post by **Freakaloin** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 4:45 pm

why would i? they already have all of ours...

Post by **GONNAFISTYA** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 5:04 pm

Eraser wrote:
tnf wrote:Remember GKY posting about how you could send two emails to yourself (like from gmail to hotmail) and in the first email put the words "Bush" and "bomb" and maybe "whitehouse" in the subject and none of that in the second, and see that the first email gets there way behind the second one?
Yeah but that's urban legend. If it worked for you, it's pure coincidence.

Yeah....I heard that it was "an urban legend" and that it was "only a coincidence" as well....until I tested it 5 times (so there was no tie in the results)......

....it worked 5 times out of 5. Not 2 or 3 out of 5...but all 5 times.

I haven't tried it lately...because I don't care.

Post by **Freakaloin** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 5:15 pm

no one cares that u don't care...

Post by **Amurka** » Fri Mar 24, 2006 4:02 am

Government spying on citizens? you're crazy! that's never happened before i am totally shocked.