Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Advertising on Film -Tech Spell check?

This is topic Advertising on Film -Tech Spell check? in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=004383

Posted by Erick Akers (Member # 875) on 12-05-2005, 12:39 PM:

I dont usually use the F-T spell check but I wanted to ask about the advertising window.
Is this something new, or being hijacked by some unknown source?

Posted by Dominic Espinosa (Member # 2122) on 12-05-2005, 01:11 PM:

What advertising window?
Methinks you have adware on your 'puter...

Posted by Bob Maar (Member # 763) on 12-05-2005, 02:19 PM:

I see the Ad on my computer.

It even say's that I won a prize.

Maybe thay want me to win a vacation to Dallas to meet "Walker Texas Ranger".

Posted by James R. Hammonds, Jr (Member # 673) on 12-05-2005, 03:39 PM:

Cold it be that the ads are actually coming from SpellCheck.net?
Shop at Jerk-It City!

Posted by Erick Akers (Member # 875) on 12-05-2005, 03:57 PM:

That could be it,
The spell check window dosen't extend below the ad window on my browser.
At first it said I won a prize, then the ad for Jerk It City appeared.

Maybe Brad could look in to it,
he was against piggy backed advertising in the past!

I check for spyware and adware almost daily, just caught me by surprise!
I agree James,
Ad's Suck! [thumbsup]

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-05-2005, 04:20 PM:

There are no ads on this site. Anything you see is an infection in your computer.

Posted by Anslem Rayburn (Member # 1267) on 12-05-2005, 05:12 PM:

If you load the page in IE and check the source, you find :

!-- FASTCLICK.COM 468x60 Banner v1.4 for spellcheck.net -->



with a bunch of code in between. Seems to me it's being included by Spellcheck.net, and Fastclick.com is an ad/ad-tracking company.

I get a similar entry in FireFox, without the code. It loads a blank white square instead of an ad.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-05-2005, 05:29 PM:

I was thinking maybe the ad was caused by the "free" spell checker software, until I read Brad's post. I remember the dark couple of weeks a few years ago when there were banner ads on F-T. Glad those days are over! [thumbsup]

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-05-2005, 07:28 PM:

Ain't nothin' is for free, mofos. You want free, you gots to take da adz dat come with it.

Posted by Bob Maar (Member # 763) on 12-05-2005, 07:45 PM:

Some one who knows how to get rid of them should pretend I was in nursery school and post a note on how to get rid of the ads.

Posted by Adam Wilbert (Member # 1184) on 12-06-2005, 11:31 AM:

Spellcheck is for loozers.

...right in the same window.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 12-06-2005, 11:52 AM:

I like how Gmail has managed to turn webmail into a standard client side mail app.

Now I await the day people start citing it as an example of a successful centralized application role out that many having been fearing and arguing against for years. One of the first role outs to cite Gmail's success will probably be Microsoft's "Office Web Edition".

Oh yeah, I also like how this topic comes up about once a year when people (re)notice the ads on Spellcheck.net's site (which is what you see when you hit the Spell Check button). Don't let the Film-Tech branding fool you.

Posted by Brad Bridges (Member # 3484) on 12-06-2005, 08:31 PM:

Has anyone ever thought of making an on site spell check and not using a third party? It's quite easy with PHP if the pspell lib is installed. Or even the aspell lib. I have wrote one in php in the past, but that was for my own systems. I am not sure how F-T's forum works.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 12-06-2005, 08:41 PM:

quote: Brad Bridges
Has anyone ever thought of making an on site spell check and not using a third party?

Not including you, yes.

quote: Brad Bridges
It's quite easy with PHP if the pspell lib is installed. Or even the aspell lib. I have wrote one in php in the past, but that was for my own systems.

Letting a third party update and manage the dictionary is easy too. In fact, it's probably a lot easier than getting a PHP library to work in a different programming language (thankfully UBB isn't written in the Swiss cheese known as PHP -- that's why it's not completely insecure like phpBB).

quote: Brad Bridges
I am not sure how F-T's forum works.

That's not the important part. The important part is that it already works as is. [Smile]

Posted by Steve Scott (Member # 630) on 12-06-2005, 08:49 PM:

quote: Daryl C. W. O'Shea
That's not the important part. The important part is that it already works as is.

Wake up Neo... The F-T Forums have you...

Posted by Brad Bridges (Member # 3484) on 12-06-2005, 08:58 PM:

Interesting some links post to php files some post to cgi. Confused me for a bit. So if no one minds me asking what language is F-T in?

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 12-06-2005, 08:59 PM:

It's just an illusion (a cache wrapper). Everything is in Fortran IV.

Posted by Brad Bridges (Member # 3484) on 12-06-2005, 09:04 PM:

Gotcha

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 12-06-2005, 09:11 PM:

I'm just kidding, it's Perl (the duct tape of the Internet). Fortran sucks, although not anywhere nearly as much as PHP.

The ONE PHP script is just a cache accessor which runs slightly faster than the Perl version. It's slightly faster since PHP is loaded as an Apache module whereas the Perl version requires an invocation of the Perl interpreter. One day when I get around to making the Perl version mod_perl compatible it'll be faster than the PHP version.

Posted by Brad Bridges (Member # 3484) on 12-06-2005, 10:15 PM:

I wondered, but I am not one to question. I am a fan of perl, but I grew up on PHP sadly. Although, I would rather write perl than c or it's children.