We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Technical problem We are having some problems with the White Rose comments system (as in “it is completely buggered up” sort of problem). This has been caused by the installation of some comment anti-spam defenses over on Samizdata.net, which shares server space and some system resources with White Rose.
We hope to have the comments up and running again soon. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Update: Fixed! The comments are now working fine once again
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
Just testing the fix.
All right, seems to be “not completely buggered up” anymore.
Since this anti-spamming trickery is all part of the free society (as opposed to state interference) answer to spamming, I hope a technical query about it is acceptable here.
The six digit number I just copied is a graphics file which is not scanable or copy-and-pastable, right? So that means a commenting “machine” can’t handle it, and spam comments have to be done by hand, which defeats the point of the exercise.
Have I got that about right?
Brian, that is entirely correct
What was the bug? I’m having my own problems implementing this code.