Posted by Hadron on 07/15/07 14:56

"rf" <rf@invalid.com> writes:

> "Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:4Lmdnax6xKkAvwfbnZ2dnUVZ_t-gnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> Hadron wrote:
>
>>>> Why show a questionable "information" that is of absolutely no use for
>>>> the visitor? Just to show how cool and active the "community" is? If you
>>>> want that you can use rand() - it's much easier than all others
>>>> methods.
>>>
>>> As I said - you are clueless.
>>>
>>
>> Yep, you are totally clueless. You have absolutely no idea how this
>> works, and think you can pull the wool over experienced programmers' eyes.
>>
>> You can do it to clueless clients. But you can't do it here.
>>
>> And I pity those clients.
>
> You will never convice these sort of people. They, without a clear
> understanding of how the protocol actually works, will continually insist
> that you can tally "current viewers". I've seen it time and time
> again. I've

The viewer is the session for crying out loud.

> even explained to some of them that they will completely miss the viewer
> that has obtained a copy of their page from a corporate proxy (with of
> course no access at all to their server), to no avail. They simply will not
> understand. It's right up there with "N people have visited this site
> since..." :-)
>
> Just let them put their meaningless counters on their web sites. It does no
> harm, providing, as you say, they are not telling their "clients" that it
> has meaning.

I am frightened that you seem unable to understand such simple concepts.

You know, I think you should suggest to banks that they dont really know
if someone is there and should end all session based online banking.

Or they could do the SENSIBLE thing and ASSUME in many cases that the
fact that someone opened the session means that there is a HIGH
PROBABILITY that someone os THERE. Possibly implement a time out. Oh,
they do jus that.

Idiot.

[Back to original message]