Log in

View Full Version : Stop Paying for Shit! - The College Edition



DIzzIE
28th February 2007, 09:42
Stop Paying for Shit! – The College Edition: A Mini-Manual of Scams, Cons, and Grifts to Exploit Higher Education

PDF version for viewing online (http://www.dizzy.ws/stop.paying.for.shit.the.college.edition.(for.digi tal.viewing).pdf) (mirror) (http://www.rorta.net/textfiles/stop.paying.for.shit.the.college.edition.(for.digi tal.viewing).pdf) [334 Kb]

PDF version for duplex printing (http://www.dizzy.ws/stop.paying.for.shit.the.college.edition.(for.prin ting).pdf) (mirror) (http://www.rorta.net/textfiles/stop.paying.for.shit.the.college.edition.(for.prin ting).pdf) [320 Kb]

DIzzIE
28th February 2007, 09:47
HTML (http://forum.rorta.net/showthread.php?t=735) version. [~250 Kb]

Note 1: Again, when trying to post the entire manual here, I receive a '403 Forbidden' error repeatedly.

Note 2: Double (or is that triple) again, sorry about the PDF. Use a reader such as Ghostscript or Xpdf to avoid that vile Adobe Acrobat trash.

apathy maybe
28th February 2007, 13:48
Please don't try and paste the entire manual here. That would just be stupid.
If you have any particularly, interesting bits, you could post them.

It does seem like a good read, and I might if I can be bothered, try some of them.

DIzzIE
6th March 2007, 22:06
Originally posted by apathy [email protected] 28, 2007 01:48 pm
Please don't try and paste the entire manual here. That would just be stupid.
If you have any particularly, interesting bits, you could post them.

It does seem like a good read, and I might if I can be bothered, try some of them.
I don't think I'm quite riding on your wave of reasoning...why would it be stupid to post the entire thing here? :huh:

My own thinking in wanting to do so is that it a) provides an additional mirror of the text, in case the given links stop working at some point in the future, b) may allow other forum members to find pertinent info contained therein if they use the forum's search feature, and c) it's easier to just read it once you click on the post, rather than having to click on yet another link to open the text...

yippie666
7th March 2007, 03:23
Originally posted by [email protected] 06, 2007 10:06 pm
I don't think I'm quite riding on your wave of reasoning...why would it be stupid to post the entire thing here?
bandwidth... :)

DIzzIE
7th March 2007, 06:13
Originally posted by yippie666+March 07, 2007 03:23 am--> (yippie666 @ March 07, 2007 03:23 am)
[email protected] 06, 2007 10:06 pm
I don't think I'm quite riding on your wave of reasoning...why would it be stupid to post the entire thing here?
bandwidth... :) [/b]
Well, the HTML version is less than 250 Kb, and the PDFs are less than 350 Kb...that's a loading time of somewhere a little under 3 and 4 minutes, respectively, on a 14.4 baud modem...

It would, however, take 2.3/3.25 hours (respectively) on a 300 baud modem (about .03 Kb/sec I think), which I believe is the slowest they (used to) make. So, you're quite right, I apologize for not taking the lower-speed users into consideration with my objection. However, at the same time I must point out that as a typical page load of the forum would also take them quite some time, it may indeed actually be more efficient (since this seems to be what your argument is about...boosting efficiency) for them to click on the one link in the main DIY forum, rather than first waiting for this page to load, and then having to click on yet another link...just a thought.

That is to say, if I do not post the entire textfile here, the bandwidth required would be: DIY forum index page + this post page + the link (which then contains the textfile in question), whereas if I did post the textfile here, this post page would be combined with the HTML version of the textfile, reducing any of the additional overhead that HTML link above has (since it, too, is posted in another forum...)

I did, however, add filesizes to the links above. Hope this helps! :ph34r:

Edit: And I shiver at the amount of extra bandwidth that will now be spent by your respective connections in having to load this reply, mea culpa :wacko: