|
Re: Is it harmful to spend too long on PerlMonks?
by JavaFan (Canon) on Oct 03, 2008 at 17:20 UTC
|
HTTP is a simple, stateless protocol which basically goes "client contacts server; client asks URI; server sends response; connection gets dropped".
"Logged on" cannot be compared with logging in using telnet, ssh, or on the console. "Logged on" just means "having send a request to the server in the past X minutes", for some X. | [reply] |
|
|
Which doesn't mean leaving a browser window opened might not cause load on the server. The whole page or parts may be refreshed automatically, even if no one watches. The protocol is stateless, the browser is not. So on some sites enough forgotten windows may slow the server down.
| [reply] |
|
|
Howdy!
The oft-misapplied verb "log on" includes some manner of authentication. If I just
visit a web site, I'm not "logged on" in any meaningful way. If I provide
credentials, typically a user ID and password, *then* (and only then) have I
"logged on".
Advertisements that exhort me to "log on" to a web site are almost never using the
right verb. "Visit" is far more appropriate in nearly every case.
| [reply] |
|
|
And don't get me started on the commercial I heard on the radio this morning exhorting me to "click on" blahdiblah.com . . .
Then again if they understood how computers worked they wouldn't be stuck in marketing . . . :)
The cake is a lie.
The cake is a lie.
The cake is a lie.
| [reply] |
Re: Is it harmful to spend too long on PerlMonks?
by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Oct 03, 2008 at 17:24 UTC
|
We should all be trying much harder to make PerlMonks crash and burn. It's too big to fail so we'll end up billionaires with a new version if we can only drive it into the ground. Remember it's illegal to short Java.
Or seriously: Having the tabs/windows open doesn't eat up extra resources since there is nothing persistently dynamic going on (unless you have chat clients open which strikes me as pretty rude if you're not actually there). So, don't worry. And being here often is the biggest reason I'm an overpaid successful developer so using the site often is definitely not harmful in that regard. ...Maybe to your rear.
| [reply] |
|
|
We should all be trying much harder to make PerlMonks crash and burn. It's too big to fail so we'll end up billionaires with a new version if we can only drive it into the ground.
Ah ha! The Windows argument!!
Remember it's illegal to short Java. Ooh.. topical!
Or seriously: Having the tabs/windows open doesn't eat up extra resources since there is nothing persistently dynamic going on Figures. As also implied by JavaFan. (unless you have chat clients open which strikes me as pretty rude if you're not actually there).
I tend only to have the passive CB60 so no harm there. Thanks, I shall keep all my many windows and tabs open! (Session Manager says 30/99)
This signature will be ready by Christmas
| [reply] |
Re: Is it harmful to spend too long on PerlMonks?
by zentara (Cardinal) on Oct 03, 2008 at 19:33 UTC
|
Wouldn't your name being listed in the Users list, and being sent out on every page request be a drag? jvector x a million may waste enough energy to make a killer hurricane down the road. It's all your fault jvector. :-)
| [reply] |
|
|
Wouldn't your name being listed in the Users list, and being sent out on every page request be a drag? jvector x a million may waste enough energy to make a killer hurricane down the road. It's all your fault jvector. :-)
<butterfly in Indian subcontinent> I didn't do it! </butterfly in Indian subcontinent> B-)
This signature will be ready by Christmas
| [reply] |
Re: Is it harmful to spend too long on PerlMonks?
by Burak (Chaplain) on Oct 03, 2008 at 17:53 UTC
|
Other Users nodelet, which kind of suggests that most other users log in, do their thing, and log out again.
I hate the default theme of PerlMonks (Perl-Blue is better). So, never logout :)
| [reply] |
|
|
My thoughts exactly :o
I'm so adjective, I verb nouns! chomp; # nom nom nom
| [reply] |
Re: Is it harmful to spend too long on PerlMonks?
by Gavin (Archbishop) on Oct 03, 2008 at 17:38 UTC
|
| [reply] |
|
|
| [reply] |
Re: Is it harmful to spend too long on PerlMonks?
by Anonymous Monk on Oct 03, 2008 at 17:33 UTC
|
PerlMonks makes you drink :D | [reply] |
|
|
| [reply] |
Re: Is it harmful to spend too long on PerlMonks?
by repellent (Priest) on Oct 07, 2008 at 17:37 UTC
|
Whoa! I always thought the question was whether it would be harmful to the human user, not the PM server itself...
Give it some time, jvector. You'll be asking if you're harming yourself soon enough ;-) | [reply] |
|
|
Thank you repellent, I am sure you are right...
No, initially it was a purely altruistic question! The /other/ question, whether 'too much PM' is harmful to the user, is something else again... (I have a suspicion that my "better half" might have something to contribute here)
(I love this place...)
This signature will be ready by Christmas
| [reply] |
|
|
Ahh, yes..the "better half" is usually most involved and cued in right at the mention of that question (is spending too much time on PM affecting me). i. e. " Well maybe if you weren't on Perl Monks all night you could've done blahblah..." or "Oh, Perl Monks again...How are the boys..." or "Maybe if you spent less time on Perl Monks and more time on blahdeblah....".
PM Relationship Saving Excuses <-- Latest node addition! (This is the birth of an idea, people, not really alive yet, so even though it seemingly should be a link to something, it isn't, so don't click on it, I made it appear as a real link for comic effect, it's all working together for the group effort towards my charm :D) All monks get together and donate their best, most widely successful "I was on PM all night, again, because..." sentence finishers.
| [reply] |
|
|
|
|
|
|