Another view of Maps :-)

[Wes Groleau]

http://tinyurl.com/ar6y3xu

--
Wes Groleau

“Grant me the serenity to accept those I cannot change;
the courage to change the one I can;
and the wisdom to know it's me.”
— unknown

[nospam]

In article <k77ikn$2s9$1...@dont-email.me>, Wes Groleau
<Grolea...@FreeShell.org> wrote:

> http://tinyurl.com/ar6y3xu

content is currently unavailable.

does it require a facebook login? if so, link the actual image not the
whole page.

[Wes Groleau]

Didn't know that was possible: http://tinyurl.com/ar6y3xu


--
Wes Groleau

Guidelines for judging others:
1. Don't attribute to malice that which
can be adequately explained by stupidity.
2. Don't attribute to stupidity that which
can be adequately explained by ignorance.
3. Don't attribute to ignorance that which
can be adequately explained by misunderstanding.
4. Don't attribute to misunderstanding that which
can be adequately explained by alcohol.

[nospam]

In article <k79ts6$rg2$2...@dont-email.me>, Wes Groleau

<Grolea...@FreeShell.org> wrote:

> >> http://tinyurl.com/ar6y3xu
> >
> > content is currently unavailable.
> >
> > does it require a facebook login? if so, link the actual image not the
> > whole page.
>
> Didn't know that was possible: http://tinyurl.com/ar6y3xu

same link, same problem.

assuming it's a jpeg image, you want the link to the actual jpeg
itself, not the entire page.

[Wes Groleau]

I thought it looked the same. tinyurl is too smart for its own good:
the two URIs I fed it were quite obviously not the same.


--
Wes Groleau

“Would the prodigal have gone home if
the elder brother was running the farm?”
— James Jordan

[Wes Groleau]

On 11-05-2012 00:25, Wes Groleau wrote:
> http://tinyurl.com/ar6y3xu

which apparently Facebook has figured out how to make not work.

iPhone or iPad on the ground in many pieces.

Large dog nearby.

Caption: "I was afraid you would use IOS Maps and I'd never see you again."

[Salgud]

On Tue, 06 Nov 2012 20:12:33 -0500, Wes Groleau wrote:

> On 11-06-2012 08:08, nospam wrote:
>> In article <k79ts6$rg2$2...@dont-email.me>, Wes Groleau
>> <Grolea...@FreeShell.org> wrote:
>>
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/ar6y3xu
>>>>
>>>> content is currently unavailable.
>>>>
>>>> does it require a facebook login? if so, link the actual image not the
>>>> whole page.
>>>
>>> Didn't know that was possible: http://tinyurl.com/ar6y3xu
>>
>> same link, same problem.
>>
>> assuming it's a jpeg image, you want the link to the actual jpeg
>> itself, not the entire page.
>
> I thought it looked the same. tinyurl is too smart for its own good:
> the two URIs I fed it were quite obviously not the same.

They never will be. That's not how tinyurl, or any url shortener works.

[Wes Groleau]

What are you talking about? tinyurl has no control over
what I paste in.

--
Wes Groleau

Even if you do learn to speak correct English,
whom are you going to speak it to?
— Clarence Darrow

[Salgud]

On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 19:08:19 -0500, Wes Groleau wrote:

> On 11-07-2012 10:37, Salgud wrote:
>> On Tue, 06 Nov 2012 20:12:33 -0500, Wes Groleau wrote:
>>> I thought it looked the same. tinyurl is too smart for its own good:
>>> the two URIs I fed it were quite obviously not the same.
>>
>> They never will be. That's not how tinyurl, or any url shortener works.
>
> What are you talking about? tinyurl has no control over
> what I paste in.

Sorry I tried to offer some help.

[Alan Browne]

On 2012.11.06 20:12 , Wes Groleau wrote:
> On 11-06-2012 08:08, nospam wrote:
>> In article <k79ts6$rg2$2...@dont-email.me>, Wes Groleau
>> <Grolea...@FreeShell.org> wrote:
>>
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/ar6y3xu
>>>>
>>>> content is currently unavailable.
>>>>
>>>> does it require a facebook login? if so, link the actual image not the
>>>> whole page.
>>>
>>> Didn't know that was possible: http://tinyurl.com/ar6y3xu
>>
>> same link, same problem.
>>
>> assuming it's a jpeg image, you want the link to the actual jpeg
>> itself, not the entire page.
>
> I thought it looked the same. tinyurl is too smart for its own good:
> the two URIs I fed it were quite obviously not the same.

Has absolutely nothing to do with tinyurl.



--
"There were, unfortunately, no great principles on which parties
were divided – politics became a mere struggle for office."
-Sir John A. Macdonald

[Wes Groleau]

On 11-08-2012 17:21, Alan Browne wrote:
> On 2012.11.06 20:12 , Wes Groleau wrote:
>> On 11-06-2012 08:08, nospam wrote:
>>> In article <k79ts6$rg2$2...@dont-email.me>, Wes Groleau
>>> <Grolea...@FreeShell.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/ar6y3xu
>>>>>
>>>>> content is currently unavailable.
>>>>>
>>>>> does it require a facebook login? if so, link the actual image not the
>>>>> whole page.
>>>>
>>>> Didn't know that was possible: http://tinyurl.com/ar6y3xu
>>>
>>> same link, same problem.
>>>
>>> assuming it's a jpeg image, you want the link to the actual jpeg
>>> itself, not the entire page.
>>
>> I thought it looked the same. tinyurl is too smart for its own good:
>> the two URIs I fed it were quite obviously not the same.
>
> Has absolutely nothing to do with tinyurl.

I gave tinyurl two different URIs, and it gave the second one the same
code as the first. One was the Facebook page hosting the image, and one
was just the image. tinyuri somehow figured out the similarity and gave
me the same code as before.

What do _you_ think it has something to do with?

[Alan Browne]

On 2012.11.09 00:34 , Wes Groleau wrote:
> On 11-08-2012 17:21, Alan Browne wrote:
>> On 2012.11.06 20:12 , Wes Groleau wrote:
>>> On 11-06-2012 08:08, nospam wrote:
>>>> In article <k79ts6$rg2$2...@dont-email.me>, Wes Groleau
>>>> <Grolea...@FreeShell.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/ar6y3xu
>>>>>>
>>>>>> content is currently unavailable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> does it require a facebook login? if so, link the actual image not
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> whole page.
>>>>>
>>>>> Didn't know that was possible: http://tinyurl.com/ar6y3xu
>>>>
>>>> same link, same problem.
>>>>
>>>> assuming it's a jpeg image, you want the link to the actual jpeg
>>>> itself, not the entire page.
>>>
>>> I thought it looked the same. tinyurl is too smart for its own good:
>>> the two URIs I fed it were quite obviously not the same.
>>
>> Has absolutely nothing to do with tinyurl.
>
> I gave tinyurl two different URIs, and it gave the second one the same
> code as the first. One was the Facebook page hosting the image, and one
> was just the image. tinyuri somehow figured out the similarity and gave
> me the same code as before.
>
> What do _you_ think it has something to do with?

tinyurl does not "figure out" anything. It simply stores the actual
link in a database against a short string link to that link. When you
access the tinurl link it simply returns the real link. Nothing else.

It _may_ also, before storing the link, scan to see if it already has
the same target link in the database and return back that existing short
link. It may not.

It does NOT open the link or check or do anything smart. It has no idea
if the link is real at the time it is tiny'd, nor if it survives, nor if
it's accessible to everyone, a few people or none when used.

So, if the content there has changed, or (as often happens) is available
to someone signed in to a target site, but not to others who are not,
then the person who uses the short link may get something unexpected,
failed or otherwise.

Again, tinyurl has nothing to do with how you see a particular linked
page and how someone else may see it.

[Wes Groleau]

On 11-09-2012 16:37, Alan Browne wrote:
> tinyurl does not "figure out" anything. It simply stores the actual
> link in a database against a short string link to that link. When you
> access the tinurl link it simply returns the real link. Nothing else.
>
> It _may_ also, before storing the link, scan to see if it already has
> the same target link in the database and return back that existing short
> link. It may not.

It does.

But I didn't give it the same URI, yet it returned the same code.


--
Wes Groleau

"What progress we are making! In the Middle Ages, they would have
burnt me; nowadays they are content with burning my books.”
— Sigmund Freud, 1933
"He was never to know that even that was only an illusory progress,
that ten years later they would have burned his body as well.”
— Ernest Jones, 1953

[Alan Browne]

On 2012.11.09 21:39 , Wes Groleau wrote:
> On 11-09-2012 16:37, Alan Browne wrote:
>> tinyurl does not "figure out" anything. It simply stores the actual
>> link in a database against a short string link to that link. When you
>> access the tinurl link it simply returns the real link. Nothing else.
>>
>> It _may_ also, before storing the link, scan to see if it already has
>> the same target link in the database and return back that existing short
>> link. It may not.
>
> It does.
>
> But I didn't give it the same URI, yet it returned the same code.

Finger fumble perhaps - you gave it the same link each time w/o
realizing it?

[Wes Groleau]

On 11-10-2012 08:09, Alan Browne wrote:
> On 2012.11.09 21:39 , Wes Groleau wrote:
>> On 11-09-2012 16:37, Alan Browne wrote:
>>> tinyurl does not "figure out" anything. It simply stores the actual
>>> link in a database against a short string link to that link. When you
>>> access the tinurl link it simply returns the real link. Nothing else.
>>>
>>> It _may_ also, before storing the link, scan to see if it already has
>>> the same target link in the database and return back that existing short
>>> link. It may not.
>>
>> It does.
>>
>> But I didn't give it the same URI, yet it returned the same code.
>
> Finger fumble perhaps - you gave it the same link each time w/o
> realizing it?

Nope. One was much longer than the other. But the short one was a
substring of the long one. The long one was a Facebook showing a photo
page, with the photo URI as a CGI parameter.

The short one was just the photo URI.

Obviously tinyurl had some way of deciding the two were effectively the
same.

--
Wes Groleau

I've noticed lately that the paranoid fear of computers becoming
intelligent and taking over the world has almost entirely disappeared
from the common culture. Near as I can tell, this coincides with
the release of MS-DOS.
— Larry DeLuca

[Alan Browne]

On 2012.11.10 13:30 , Wes Groleau wrote:
> On 11-10-2012 08:09, Alan Browne wrote:
>> On 2012.11.09 21:39 , Wes Groleau wrote:
>>> On 11-09-2012 16:37, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>> tinyurl does not "figure out" anything. It simply stores the actual
>>>> link in a database against a short string link to that link. When you
>>>> access the tinurl link it simply returns the real link. Nothing else.
>>>>
>>>> It _may_ also, before storing the link, scan to see if it already has
>>>> the same target link in the database and return back that existing
>>>> short
>>>> link. It may not.
>>>
>>> It does.
>>>
>>> But I didn't give it the same URI, yet it returned the same code.
>>
>> Finger fumble perhaps - you gave it the same link each time w/o
>> realizing it?
>
> Nope. One was much longer than the other. But the short one was a
> substring of the long one. The long one was a Facebook showing a photo
> page, with the photo URI as a CGI parameter.
>
> The short one was just the photo URI.
>
> Obviously tinyurl had some way of deciding the two were effectively the
> same.

Tinyurl may delete/ignore everything after a "?" in the URI as it's not
needed to locate the specific page. So, in the end ...

[Wes Groleau]

On 11-11-2012 13:56, Alan Browne wrote:
> Tinyurl may delete/ignore everything after a "?" in the URI as it's not
> needed to locate the specific page. So, in the end ...

The first part may be true but the second is definitely not.
Generally what's after the ? is what determines the actual content.
So my "tinyurl is too smart for its own good" stands.

--
Wes Groleau

“To know what you prefer, instead of humbly saying
Amen to what the world tells you you should prefer,
is to have kept your soul alive.”
— Robert Louis Stevenson

[Alan Browne]

On 2012.11.12 00:07 , Wes Groleau wrote:
> On 11-11-2012 13:56, Alan Browne wrote:
>> Tinyurl may delete/ignore everything after a "?" in the URI as it's not
>> needed to locate the specific page. So, in the end ...
>
> The first part may be true but the second is definitely not.
> Generally what's after the ? is what determines the actual content.
> So my "tinyurl is too smart for its own good" stands.

I made an error in putting in "?". I meant to put in "&".

eg:
http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/224792?cam=Dev&ctp=Carousel&cdt=1&cdn=224792
http://tinyurl.com/ajun58e

and http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/224792?cam=Dev
http://tinyurl.com/a4vwq9t

Resolve to the same thing but get different links at tinyurl.

http://tinyurl.com/ajun58e
http://tinyurl.com/a4vwq9t respectively.

So tinyurl, in this sense, is blind. Or not smart at all.

Your first link in your OP has "&" in it. But since the page doesn't
work at all ...

[Wes Groleau]

On 11-13-2012 16:32, Alan Browne wrote:
> Your first link in your OP has "&" in it. But since the page doesn't
> work at all ...

Worked for me (obviously).

But the second URI I pasted in, which gave the same hash, had
neither ? nor & -- it was merely the URI of the photo itself.

You suggested I might have repasted the page URI by mistake.

I don't know for sure what I pasted the second time, but I am sure it
wasn't the same thing on the clipboard, since it was 21 hours later and
the computer had been shut down at least once in between.

But I just went to the photo again and did that, and got a different hash:
http://tinyurl.com/b65pjlm

[Alan Browne]

On 2012.11.13 20:28 , Wes Groleau wrote:
> On 11-13-2012 16:32, Alan Browne wrote:
>> Your first link in your OP has "&" in it. But since the page doesn't
>> work at all ...
>
> Worked for me (obviously).
>
> But the second URI I pasted in, which gave the same hash, had
> neither ? nor & -- it was merely the URI of the photo itself.
>
> You suggested I might have repasted the page URI by mistake.
>
> I don't know for sure what I pasted the second time, but I am sure it
> wasn't the same thing on the clipboard, since it was 21 hours later and
> the computer had been shut down at least once in between.
>
> But I just went to the photo again and did that, and got a different hash:
> http://tinyurl.com/b65pjlm

Right. The link that didn't work before. Uh huh.

[JF Mezei]

BBC article on Nokia's map efforts


Nokia Maps digitises streets to battle Google's threat
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20497719

navteq is putting LIDAR on its fleet of "street view" cameras to get 3d
view of streets as well as spot road signs.

Article provides some history of NavTeq (this is the map source for
Garmin's GPS units BTW).

new piece of info they want to collect is slope of roads. This would
help truckers choose roads with the least elevation changes (this costs
fuel and wear on brakes).


It would not surprise me to see Apple buy TomTom very soon and infuse
enough capital into it to deploy its own street veiw cars and spend
whatever it takes to ramp up the mapping quality. This would be one way
for Apple to use its non-USA cash.

[JF Mezei]

This is an interesting one:

Updated my Garmin GPS maps for north america. It says it has the 2013 maps.

For a 2013 map, it shows no signs of a new stub of highway (highway 30)
that will link the 540 at Dorion to Valleyfield/Chateaugay set to open
this coming week.

It still shows some of the roads that were closed to make way for that
highway as being usable. This happened 2 years ago.

Firther east in Ste-Anne-de-Bellevue, 2 bridges part of a highway
interchange were closed 2 years ago blocking not only traffic over the
bridge but also under it. As a result, certain ramps to the highway are
closed and you can't travel east of the interchange since you would have
to pass under one of those bridges.

This is still showns as passage.


The same happens for Google maps. Of course, for Google, this is easir
to fix since they are an on-line service instead of an annual download
service.


But this does show the difficulties in maintaining a owrldwide mapping
service.

Since Apple won't let me see their map content on the web, I can't
comment on how they render those areas.

[JF Mezei]

Police concerned with Apple iOS 6 mapping system

> http://www.vicpolicenews.com.au/more-news/11081-police-concerned-with-apple-ios-6-mapping-system.html


Mildura Police are urging motorists to be careful when relying on the
mapping system on the Apple i-phones operating on the iOS 6 system after
a number of motorists were directed off the beaten track in recent weeks.

Local Police have been called to assist distressed motorists who have
become stranded within the Murray-Sunset National Park after following
directions on their Apple i-phone.

Tests on the mapping system by police confirm the mapping systems lists
Mildura in the middle of the Murray Sunset National Park, approximately
70km away from the actual location of Mildura.

Police are extremely concerned as there is no water supply within the
Park and temperatures can reach as high as 46 degrees, making this a
potentially life threatening issue.

Some of the motorists located by police have been stranded for up to 24
hours without food or water and have walked long distances through
dangerous terrain to get phone reception.

Police have contacted Apple in relation to the issue and hope the matter
is rectified promptly to ensure the safety of motorists travelling to
Mildura.

Anyone travelling to Mildura or other locations within Victoria should
rely on other forms of mapping until this matter is rectified.

[Jolly Roger]

In article <50c57a99$0$64486$c3e8da3$5077...@news.astraweb.com>,

Only an idiot would get themselves stranded like that. LOL...

--
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR