Posts by Mark Harris
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Name three.
(Sorry, had to be done)
1. It's not Lower Hutt
2. It's not Palmerston North.
and most importantly,
3. It's not Auckland.Auckland heeft meer meh.
For. The. Win.
-
It says to me: "I'm glad we don't host in New Zealand"
I'd call that a better bandwidth plan ;-)
-
I just watched it again. Clocked Corbet the Strange, and I guess the woman sitting at the takeaways cart is Boh Runga (though I thought it odd the first time I saw it that they were including a streetwalker on her break, which is why the camera looked away in an embarrased way) but I really couldn't make out anyone else. The first time I saw it, I thought it was for chocolate or something European. I laughed out loud when I saw the gates.
And no, I don't think the Wellington ones are any better, before you ask.
-
Shit. I missed the celebrities!
-
*plonk*
-
Are services, such as Google Analytics and Nielsen, that use tracking code on third-party websites any different?
AFAIK
GA can tell you about your site's activity. It takes its own logfiles based on its monitoring of your site. Each 'page' is tagged and Google keeps count. I'm not aware that it does comparative analysis with other sites as that would require access to their 'private' data.ACNeilsen/NetRatings is sort of a black box. They use a lot of proprietary methods and no-one is really sure how it works. See their online page
Nielsen and Analytics are generally very close for all the sites I know about, so whatever they're measuring, they're getting the same results.
I've seen that, and I've seen the total opposite - I honestly don't know. In the end, comparitive analysis with other sites is not hugely useful. You can spend an awful lot of time getting to be number one in your niche and find that you've spent more getting there than it was worth.
Are your customers happy? Are there more every month? (No? What did you change?) These questions are more important. Reading logfiles or any analytics is a black art because every site is different.
Also, our log stats say ~85% of our traffic by volume is now MP3 files. The PA Radio podcast is a rather vivid long-tail story.
That says to me "buy more storage and get a better bandwidth plan" ;-)
-
Having played in the web-serving space for 13 or so years, I'll state with a degree of certainty that log stats are only useful for
* determining whether your site is adequately provisioned for the number of http (and other) calls you get,
* detecting what pages people are not getting (e.g. 404) as that may indicate a mistake on someone else's page, or that you've broken something
* detecting trends as certain files (articles, images etc) become more popular
* indicators of where people came from to your site and where they went afterwards
* some other useful indicators of how people use your siteWhat they are not useful for is absolute numbers of people who viewed your site. And they're really crap for comparing sites numerically. I agree with Stephen that you can get some relative information which may or may not be useful, but there are no absolute metrics that I would trust except how hard my server has to work to fulfil requests.
-
The police have a... I forget the unit name... electronic crimes unit or something. Mostly civilians, IT graduates. They would have done the investigation into the technical details.
Yes they do and they're very good at it. If there was something to be found, they would have found it.
I've always gone for the simpler answer. Somebody, with authorised access (whether Brash knew they had it or not) chose to leak them to Hager.
Hell, the parliamentary system is hard enough to navigate when you've got a logon. I can't see anyone hacking in from outside and finding Brash's email even if they knew where to look.
-
Wow. Your analytical ability stuns me.
Mark Harris switches into total arsehole mode without provocation.Ah yes, the "witty quip", used as a screen to not address the point. Not quite sure why challenging your comments is automatically "arsehole mode", but there we go.
You said:
Should Macintyre have stayed in that marriage because her wife had mental health issues?
I pointed out that:
I don't think it's been established that McAuley had "mental health issues", however you might define those.
to which you responded:
Her husband left her, she killed herself. Isn't it a tad self-evident?
Which came first - the mental health issues or the divorce? Which caused which?
The analytical and logical failure evident in your comments is what stuns me, whether you like it or not.
-
Her husband left her, she killed herself. Isn't it a tad self-evident?
Wow. Your analytical ability stuns me.
He was able to predict
that she would be unstable if he left,
so that was sufficient reason
for him to leave.Wow.