I know I can trigger (from C++) the current user to be logged out of Windows (XP/Vista). Is it possible to SWITCH users either by triggering a logout/login or by triggering a fast user switch without the user having to do anything like enter their password, etc.? I would like to have a UI where a user can choose to switch to another user in one step (assuming they know the target password) without going through the Windows login screen. Any ideas? Thanks, Barry Etter

Barry Etter

I have a C# service that communicates to a USB flash drive. Since my program is smart enough to know when the drive is plugged in and when it's not, I don't need to have XP open the "Autorun" dialog window asking me what application to run when the drive is plugged in. Can I somehow kill this window from my C# app? I would like to do it this way because if my application is NOT running, I DO want the XP autorun dialog to display giving users the option to install the application. Any advice would be appreciated! Thanks, Barry

Barry Etter

I like that idea! How can you get the MAC address from a web request?

Barry Etter

Please don't hate me for cross posting this, but I didn't get many replies in the ASP.NET forum... I have a free website that allows alumni of my high school to sign up and share information. It's like classmates.com, except it's free to alumni of my school (http://www.daviehighalumni.com[^] if you're interested). There is one user who likes to cause problems by posting offensive messages on my message board, annoy other users, etc. I can easily block this user from signing in, but have no restrictions on creating new accounts, so they can easily create a new account and continue their behaviour. I could try requiring e-mail authentication before a new account can be used, but this person could impersonate another alumni who doesn't yet have an account. I can't base it on IP address because they change often. I can't base it on name or e-mail address because a person can easily use a different name or create a new e-mail address. Here's my last attempt to block this person: I put a tag on their profile so that when they logged in, I set a cookie on their computer. From then on, if I see this cookie, I don't let them log on or create new accounts. I thought this would keep them out for sure, but it hasn't worked as they apparently know how to delete cookies or are going to different computers. So, does anyone have any ideas on blocking a user from accessing a web site when the web site is free and allows users to create accounts? Barry Etter

Barry Etter

I have a free website that allows alumni of my high school to sign up and share information. It's like classmates.com, except it's free to alumni of my school (http://www.daviehighalumni.com[^] if you're interested). There is one user who likes to cause problems by posting offensive messages on my message board, annoy other users, etc. I can easily block this user from signing in, but have no restrictions on creating new accounts, so they can easily create a new account and continue their behaviour. I could try requiring e-mail authentication before a new account can be used, but this person could impersonate another alumni who doesn't yet have an account. I can't base it on IP address because they change often. I can't base it on name or e-mail address because a person can easily use a different name or create a new e-mail address. Here's my last attempt to block this person: I put a tag on their profile so that when they logged in, I set a cookie on their computer. From then on, if I see this cookie, I don't let them log on or create new accounts. I thought this would keep them out for sure, but it hasn't worked as they apparently know how to delete cookies or are going to different computers. So, does anyone have any ideas on blocking a user from accessing a web site when the web site is free and allows users to create accounts? Barry Etter

Hi. Is it possible to set the SMTP settings for the PasswordRecovery control from code rather than having it in the web.config file (in the System.Net -> mailSettings element)? I use the same code for several different applications and I want the e-mails to come from the various application e-mail address rather than just one hard-coded in the web.config file. I would like to set the SMTP server, username, password, etc. in the Page_Load() event, for example. None of the docs or Google hits I found addressed this for the PasswordRecovery control. I found examples of sending generic e-mails, but none address the PasswordRecovery control. Thanks! Barry Etter

This is deja vu. Wasn't this idea toyed with a long time ago as WebOS (or something like that) by the WebFX guys? If I remember correcty, theirs back in 1999 looked a lot cleaner, too. Barry Etter

I need to take a float or double value nand determine how many numbers it has before and after the decimal. Examples: 123.3 -> 3 before and 1 after .12345 -> 0 before and 5 after 123 -> 3 before and 0 after The method has to be extremely fast because it may be executed very often in a high-volume environment. I know I can convert it to a string and search for the decimal, etc., but string functions are very slow. Thanks! Barry Etter

Hey everyone. My work laptop has both wireless and wired network connections. The wireless connection is the one connected to the DSL router, hence it's the one with Internet connectivity. The wired connection goes directly to a 100Mbs hub that allows faster connections to my dev database server. For some reason, Win XP wants to use the wired connection when trying to lookup and connect to Internet addresses. How can I tell the system to always use the wireless connection for Internet traffic? To add to the confusion, I also have a VPN that's connected some times through the wireless connection. Thanks for any help! Barry Etter

What's the proper term for an "engine" that handles object-oriented runtime code? For example, the .NET CLR handles creating objects, setting fields, calling events, etc. Similarly, the java jvm handles it for java code. I'm not talking about the language, rather the thing that interprets the code at runtime. I'm wanting to know what the proper generic term is for an "object runtime engine". Barry Etter

I don't limit God in what he can do, but I do limit myself to what He said He did. Humans wrote the Bible through divine inspiration, i.e. they where simply God's instrument. Also, Jesus refered to the creation account given in Genesis...and He should know! (Mark 10:6, John 5:45-47, for example) If you read Exodus, you will wee several places where God actually wrote for Himself. For example (Exodus 34:1), the Law and the 10 Commandments where written by God in stone. By the way, He also wrote on those stone tablets (Exodus 20:11) that He created the heavens and the earth in 6 literal days, not billions of years. Barry Etter

Jeffry J. Brickley wrote:

how narcissistic of us

The understanding that we (humans and Earth) are special, despite what we're told by secular scientists, is not narcissistic. I didn't say the stars are here for me.

Jeffry J. Brickley wrote:

So God encourages and perpetuates narcissism?

You set up a straw man, which is a logical flaw. However, there are many facts that support the Anthropic Principle, which supports the fact that we are, in fact, special. Barry Etter

That's an easy question because The Creator tells us all about it. Genesis 1 mentions everything God created, including the heavens. There is no mention of Him putting life up there. Man was created to rule over the earth (Gen 1:26) and was created in the likeness of God (Gen 1:27). Then why are the stars there, you may ask? Gen 1:14-18 "'...to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years; and let them be for lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth'; and it was so. And God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night; He made the stars also. And God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, and to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good." So the stars are there for us! A good answer is also given here: UFOs and aliens—is there something going on?[^] Barry Etter

I've used both tools plus Microsoft's umdh and Software Validator's MemoryValidator. My application is huge, consumes lots of memory and has tons of allocations. Using BoundsChecker to find memory leaks is impossible. BoundsChecker slows the application to a crawl and eventually consumes all available memory, and that's just during application initialization! Purify was able to work as was MemoryValidator. For results (finding memory leaks, in my case), MemoryValidator did the best job and it's cheap compared to BoundsChecker. It will depend on what you're using the tool for (errors, leaks, coverage), what language you're using (C++, .NET, etc), the size of your application and the cost you're willing to accept. Barry Etter

I have a very large VC++ (Visual Studio 2003) Win32 console application who's memory grows at a steady rate over time. I've tried: * DevPartner BoundsChecker - System runs out of memory when application is running from BoundsChecker (we use a lot of memory and have lots of allocations) * umdh - This free tool from Microsoft can't handle the number of allocatino we do, so we can get one, maybe two, tests run before this tool stops giving data. * Purify - This tool worked to some degree, but also had limitations on how many test iterations it would handle. * HeapAgent - Just downloaded it. Any suggestions on tools that can handle a really big application? Barry Etter

Cool concept. Barry Etter

What geek could resist the color-by-numbers from this Sunday's FoxTrot? http://www.ucomics.com/foxtrot/2006/04/09/[^] Using Excel and Paint, I have the answer, posted here[^]. Note one of his numbers was divisible by both 17 and 19 (2261) so I made it a redish-orange. [EDIT] Bill Amend acknowledges the error with 2261 (http://homepage.mac.com/billamend/[^]) so that spot should be orange. [/EDIT] Barry Etter

May I ask what's so funny about an ambulance for obese people? :~ Interesting, maybe. A sad commentary on nutrition and health in the U.S., maybe. But fall-out-of-your-chair funny? Not really. Barry Etter

It took me a while to figure out what they're talking about and I'm still not sure. (I'm also hurting my fingers trying to make the VW sign). Are they saying that their car is already tuned and doesn't need additional tuning by the owner? Why then do they focus on the outer body (paint, spoilers, etc) of the victim's car? Oh, schapp! :laugh: Barry Etter

digital man wrote:

scientists are examining an event

These scientists are not examining the Big Bang. They are examining microwave signals and interpreting them based on their pre-suppositions. They have a predisposition to the universe being billions of years old and have being created by a big explosion. Therefore, their "evidence" supports them. It's the difference between operational science and creation science. Operational science involves things that can be examined and reproduced according to the scientific method. Creation science is more based on your "religion" (Humanism, Christianity, etc.). These scientists obviously are humanist (atheist) who believe there is no external being controlling the universe; and that's fine as long as their results are taken within that context rather than as "proof" of anything. You can't tell me with a straight face that these guys can tell you what happened billions of years ago when the universe was a trillionth of a second old by looking at some microwave signals? :laugh: If you believe that, you have more faith than I do! Barry Etter