Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: crazyoldman who wrote (101809)	4/3/2000 10:59:00 PM
From: Epinephrine	Respond to of 1577883

RE: <This whole thing doesn't seem to be that important, but I have no reservations about proceeding if necessary. After all, if we can all see the pictures of the processor/date codes, Elmer can then argue that AMD mismarked them!> Crazyoldman, I think you are right. I wouldn't waste my time if I were you. If someone doesn't believe you already then they are not likely to take pictures as evidence worthy of changing their mind. They could say that AMD mismarked them or even that you retouched them in Photoshop or something which would definitely be very easy to do. If you must back yourself up then just post the codes in text for us to read ourselves, that would stop any claims that you misinterpreted them, at that point the only claims could be that AMD mismarked them or that you are lying and if they think that you are lying then a picture wont help because it would be too easy to alter it. Regards, Epinephrine

To: crazyoldman who wrote (101809)	4/3/2000 11:40:00 PM
From: that_crazy_doug	Respond to of 1577883

Apologies if this is a repeat, I didn't see the first one go through for some reason ;) Why not take pictures (if you don't mind) and send them to www.aceshardware.com or www.jc-news.com. The purpose of this is two fold. 1) You won't have to make some geocities web page. 2) It will allow access to this data to all the people who don't read this thread. I feel a lot of the folks who read jc's or ace's would be very interested in the pictures. (I suppose it's triple purposed, as it would also clear up any doubts on the accuracy of you reading the codes, but I think the main benefit of it is showing it to the rest of the world) If nothing else you can email them to me, and I'll put em up for you and post the link to here.

To: crazyoldman who wrote (101809)	4/4/2000 12:23:00 AM
From: chic_hearne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577883

crazyoldman Re: didn't we have a new member that worked for IBM state that his job is designing websites? crazyguy, I'm the one. Making websites is a very complex task that involves many people with many skills. I'm new to IBM and have only done (parts) of a few sites. So far, I have handled DB stuff and SET verification. All back-end stuff that the end user never will see. I haven't done any of the actual "web pages" yet. DB: I've handled how to take a customers DB and load it into a net.commerce site. For customers with 20,000 plus products this is not an easy task. It's easy to get the products into the DB, but to get the mass import file set up so it's managable and updatable is a different task... SET: This is a very tricky thing. FYI- 90-95% of websites do not use some form of SET. For example, at amazon.com they take your CC#, but don't actually do a verification. So far, I've only run into 3 websites actually using SET, Northwest Airlines, Sun Country Airlines, and ironically, Silicon Investor. This is how you tell the difference: If you place an order and get a screen saying "please wait up to 30 seconds for verification", they are using SET. If you place an order and immediately get a response, they are not using SET. In the second situation, they are taking your CC# and sticking it in a DB to be run later. SET is very difficult to deal with because the clearinghouses operate with their own set of rules. For expample, the one I've worked with has a firewall set up to block denial of service attacks (like what happened to Yahoo recently). This firewall sometimes blocks an actual request. chic