O'Reilly Open Source Convention 2004 -- Presentation Files

Some very good presentation files - The focused topics were Postgresql,Perl, PHP & of course Open source in general....

Access it here....
O'Reilly Open Source Convention 2004 -- Presentation Files

Top 20 definitions of blogging

Very Interesting to read..

Blogging is...

#1 A form of unedited, authentic self-expression

#2 An instant publishing tool

#3 An online journal with freshly updated content

#4 Amateur journalism

#5 Something that will revolutionize the Web (think RSS feeds)

#6 A way to create community with your voters, er... readers (think 2,200 comments posted to the Dean for America blog in one day)

#7 An alternative to mainstream media (think InstaPundit by Glenn Reynolds and TalkingPointsMemo by Joshua Micah Marshall)

#8 A tool to teach students how to write (think Kaye Trammel at the University of Florida)

#9 A new way to communicate with customers (think Ray Ozzie, CEO of Groove Networks)


#10 A new form of knowledge management inside big companies

#11 A way for a bunch of navel-gazers to communicate with one another

#12 Something to keep you occupied when you're unemployed (more people than care to admit fit into this category; have you noticed?)

#13 A way to think and write in short paragraphs instead of a long essay (which no one has time to read anyway)

#14 Your email to everyone, as A-list blogger Doc Searls puts it (i.e. a way to stay in touch with family and friends)

#15 A silly word that's fun to say ("Gotta go blog now... ")

#16 A way of writing with a distinct voice and personality (think Halley Suitt)

#17 Something to talk about at cocktail parties ("I blogged Seth Godin and he blogged me back...")

#18 A URL to add to your resume (as in TokyoTim, my 23-year-old son who's living and working in Japan for a year)

#19 Something else to do with your mobile phone...think audio blogging and moblogging

#20 Something you don't want your mother to read (what my mother says about blogging)

Online Advertising Growth

Very good news for online advertising media companies...

Jupiter Research's latest forecast shows the online advertising market is poised to grow to $16.1 billion in 2009, up nearly $10 billion from $6.6 billion in 2003 (leaving magazines in the dust).

I hope, the statastics will prove itself in future....

Ebay Business Opportunity

While reading this article today, I got some interesting info to explore(because I ma interested in import/export business)....

Really nice information for export companies in India...and those who sit in USA and have indian connection....

PHP Extension for JDeveloper from Oracle

Good news for PHP Developers:

After PHP 5 has been introduced...Oracle has added an extension for PHP in its JDeveloper tool...

As IBM says...Future is Open Source....

How to get most out of Hackers???

If you want to get the most out of the hacekrs, you need to understand these especially productive people. What motivates them? What do they need to do their jobs? How do you recognize them? How do you get them to come and work for you? And then of course there's the question, how do you become one?


More than Money

I know a handful of super-hackers, so I sat down and thought about what they have in common. Their defining quality is probably that they really love to program. Ordinary programmers write code to pay the bills. Great hackers think of it as something they do for fun, and which they're delighted to find people will pay them for.

Great programmers are sometimes said to be indifferent to money. This isn't quite true. It is true that all they really care about is doing interesting work. But if you make enough money, you get to work on whatever you want, and for that reason hackers are attracted by the idea of making really large amounts of money. But as long as they still have to show up for work every day, they care more about what they do there than how much they get paid for it.

Economically, this is a fact of the greatest importance, because it means you don't have to pay great hackers anything like what they're worth. A great programmer might be ten or a hundred times as productive as an ordinary one, but he'll consider himself lucky to get paid three times as much. As I'll explain later, this is partly because great hackers don't know how good they are. But it's also because money is not the main thing they want.

What do hackers want? Like all craftsmen, hackers like good tools. In fact, that's an understatement. Good hackers find it unbearable to use bad tools. They'll simply refuse to work on projects with the wrong infrastructure.

At a startup I once worked for, one of the things pinned up on our bulletin board was an ad from IBM. It was a picture of an AS400, and the headline read, I think, "hackers despise it.'' [1]

When you decide what infrastructure to use for a project, you're not just making a technical decision. You're also making a social decision, and this may be the more important of the two. For example, if your company wants to write some software, it might seem a prudent choice to write it in Java. But when you choose a language, you're also choosing a community. The programmers you'll be able to hire to work on a Java project won't be as smart as the ones you could get to work on a project written in Python. [2] And the quality of your hackers probably matters more than the language you choose. Though, frankly, the fact that good hackers prefer Python to Java should tell you something about the relative merits of those languages.

Business types prefer the most popular languages because they view languages as standards. They don't want to bet the company on Betamax. The thing about languages, though, is that they're not just standards. If you have to move bits over a network, by all means use TCP/IP. But a programming language isn't just a format. A programming language is a medium of expression.

I've read that Java has just overtaken Cobol as the most popular language. As a standard, you couldn't wish for more. But as a medium of expression, you could do a lot better. Of all the great programmers I can think of, I know of only one who would voluntarily program in Java. And of all the great programmers I can think of who don't work for Sun, on Java, I know of zero.

Great hackers also generally insist on using open source software. Not just because it's better, but because it gives them more control. Good hackers insist on control. This is part of what makes them good hackers: when something's broken, they need to fix it. You want them to feel this way about the software they're writing for you. You shouldn't be surprised when they feel the same way about the operating system.

A couple years ago a venture capitalist friend told me about a new startup he was involved with. It sounded promising. But the next time I talked to him, he said they'd decided to build their software on Windows NT, and had just hired a very experienced NT developer to be their chief technical officer. When I heard this, I thought, these guys are doomed. One, the CTO couldn't be a first rate hacker, because to become an eminent NT developer he would have had to use NT voluntarily, multiple times, and I couldn't imagine a great hacker doing that; and two, even if he was good, he'd have a hard time hiring anyone good to work for him if the project had to be built on NT. [3]



The Final Frontier

After software, the most important tool to a hacker is probably his office. Big companies think the function of office space is to express rank. But hackers use their offices for more than that: they use their office as a place to think in. And if you're a technology company, their thoughts are your product. So making hackers work in a noisy, distracting environment is like having a paint factory where the air is full of soot.

The cartoon strip Dilbert has a lot to say about cubicles, and with good reason. All the hackers I know despise them. The mere prospect of being interrupted is enough to prevent hackers from working on hard problems. If you want to get real work done in an office with cubicles, you have two options: work at home, or come in early or late or on a weekend, when no one else is there. Don't companies realize this is a sign that something is broken? An office environment is supposed to be something you work in, not something you work despite.

Companies like Cisco are proud that everyone there has a cubicle, even the CEO. But they're not so advanced as they think; obviously they still view office space as a badge of rank. Note too that Cisco is famous for doing very little product development in house. They get new technology by buying the startups that created it-- where presumably the hackers did have somewhere quiet to work.

One big company that understands what hackers need is Microsoft. I once saw a recruiting ad for Microsoft with a big picture of a door. Work for us, the premise was, and we'll give you a place to work where you can actually get work done. And you know, Microsoft is remarkable among big companies in that they are able to develop software in house. Not well, perhaps, but well enough.

If companies want hackers to be productive, they should look at what they do at home. At home, hackers can arrange things themselves so they can get the most done. And when they work at home, hackers don't work in noisy, open spaces; they work rooms with doors. They work in cosy, neighborhoody places with people around and somewhere to walk when they need to mull something over, instead of in glass boxes set in acres of parking lots. They have a sofa they can take a nap on when they feel tired, instead of sitting in a coma at their desk, pretending to work. There's no crew of people with vacuum cleaners that roars through every evening during the prime hacking hours. There are no meetings or, God forbid, corporate retreats or team-building exercises. And when you look at what they're doing on that computer, you'll find it reinforces what I said earlier about tools. They may have to use Java and Windows at work, but at home, where they can choose for themselves, you're more likely to find them using Perl and Linux.

Indeed, these statistics about Cobol or Java being the most popular language can be misleading. What we ought to look at, if we want to know what tools are best, is what hackers choose when they can choose freely-- that is, in projects of their own. When you ask that question, you find that open source operating systems already have a dominant market share, and the number one language is probably Perl.



Interesting

Along with good tools, hackers want interesting projects. What makes a project interesting? Well, obviously overtly sexy applications like stealth planes or special effects software would be interesting to work on. But any application can be interesting if it poses novel technical challenges. So it's hard to predict which problems hackers will like, because some become interesting only when the people working on them discover a new kind of solution. Before ITA (who wrote the software inside Orbitz), the people working on airline fare searches probably thought it was one of the most boring applications imaginable. But ITA made it interesting by redefining the problem in a more ambitious way.

I think the same thing happened at Google. When Google was founded, the conventional wisdom among the so-called portals was that search was boring and unimportant. But the guys at Google didn't think search was boring, and that's why they do it so well.

This is an area where managers can make a difference. Like a parent saying to a child, I bet you can't clean up your whole room in ten minutes, a good manager can sometimes redefine a problem as a more interesting one. Steve Jobs seems to be particularly good at this, in part simply by having high standards. There were a lot of small, inexpensive computers before the Mac. He redefined the problem as: make one that's beautiful. And that probably drove the developers harder than any carrot or stick could.

They certainly delivered. When the Mac first appeared, you didn't even have to turn it on to know it would be good; you could tell from the case. A few weeks ago I was walking along the street in Cambridge, and in someone's trash I saw what appeared to be a Mac carrying case. I looked inside, and there was a Mac SE. I carried it home and plugged it in, and it booted. The happy Macintosh face, and then the finder. My God, it was so simple. It was just like ... Google.

Hackers like to work for people with high standards. But it's not enough just to be exacting. You have to insist on the right things. Which usually means that you have to be a hacker yourself. I've seen occasional articles about how to manage programmers. Really there should be two articles: one about what to do if you are yourself a programmer, and one about what to do if you're not. And the second could probably be condensed into two words: give up.

The problem is not so much the day to day management. Really good hackers are practically self-managing. The problem is, if you're not a hacker, you can't tell who the good hackers are. A similar problem explains why American cars are so ugly. I call it the design paradox. You might think that you could make your products beautiful just by hiring a great designer to design them. But if you yourself don't have good taste, how are you going to recognize a good designer? By definition you can't tell from his portfolio. And you can't go by the awards he's won or the jobs he's had, because in design, as in most fields, those tend to be driven by fashion and schmoozing, with actual ability a distant third. There's no way around it: you can't manage a process intended to produce beautiful things without knowing what beautiful is. American cars are ugly because American car companies are run by people with bad taste.

Many people in this country think of taste as something elusive, or even frivolous. It is neither. To drive design, a manager must be the most demanding user of a company's products. And if you have really good taste, you can, as Steve Jobs does, make satisfying you the kind of problem that good people like to work on.



Nasty Little Problems

It's pretty easy to say what kinds of problems are not interesting: those where instead of solving a few big, clear, problems, you have to solve a lot of nasty little ones. One of the worst kinds of projects is writing an interface to a piece of software that's full of bugs. Another is when you have to customize something for an individual client's complex and ill-defined needs. To hackers these kinds of projects are the death of a thousand cuts.

The distinguishing feature of nasty little problems is that you don't learn anything from them. Writing a compiler is interesting because it teaches you what a compiler is. But writing an interface to a buggy piece of software doesn't teach you anything, because the bugs are random. So it's not just fastidiousness that makes good hackers avoid nasty little problems. It's more a question of self-preservation. Working on nasty little problems makes you stupid. Good hackers avoid it for the same reason models avoid cheeseburgers.

(Incidentally, I think this is what people mean when they talk about the "meaning of life." On the face of it, this seems an odd idea. Life isn't an expression; how could it have meaning? But it can have a quality that feels a lot like meaning. In a project like a compiler, you have to solve a lot of problems, but the problems all fall into a pattern, as in a signal. Whereas when the problems you have to solve are random, they seem like noise. )

Of course some problems inherently have this character. And because of supply and demand, they pay especially well. So a company that found a way to get great hackers to work on tedious problems would be very successful. How would you do it?

One place this happens is in startups. At our startup we had Robert Morris working as a system administrator. That's like having the Rolling Stones play at a bar mitzvah. You can't hire that kind of talent. But people will do any amount of drudgery for companies of which they're the founders. [4]

Bigger companies solve the problem by partitioning the company. They get smart people to work for them by establishing a separate R&D department where employees don't have to work directly on customers' nasty little problems. [5] In this model, the research department functions like a mine. They produce new ideas; maybe the rest of the company will be able to use them.

You may not have to go to this extreme. Bottom-up programming suggests another way to partition the company: have the smart people work as toolmakers. If your company makes software to do x, have one group that builds tools for writing software of that type, and another that uses these tools to write the applications. This way you might be able to get smart people to write 99% of your code, but still keep them almost as insulated from users as they would be in a traditional research department. The toolmakers would have users, but they'd only be the company's own developers. [6]

If Microsoft used this approach, their software wouldn't be so full of security holes, because the less smart people writing the actual applications wouldn't be doing low-level stuff like allocating memory. Instead of writing Word directly in C, they'd be plugging together big Lego blocks of Word-language. (Duplo, I believe, is the technical term.)



Clumping

Along with interesting problems, what good hackers like is other good hackers. Great hackers tend to clump together-- sometimes spectacularly so, as at Xerox Parc. So you won't attract good hackers in linear proportion to how good an environment you create for them. The tendency to clump means it's more like the square of the environment. So it's winner take all. At any given time, there are only about ten or twenty places where hackers most want to work, and if you aren't one of them, you won't just have fewer great hackers, you'll have zero.

Having great hackers is not, by itself, enough to make a company successful. It works well for Google and ITA, which are two of the hot spots right now, but it didn't help Thinking Machines or Xerox. Sun had a good run for a while, but their business model is a down elevator. In that situation, even the best hackers can't save you.

I think, though, that all other things being equal, a company that can attract great hackers will have a huge advantage. There are people who would disagree with this. When we were making the rounds of venture capital firms in the 1990s, several told us that software companies didn't win by writing great software, but through brand, and dominating channels, and doing the right deals.

They really seemed to believe this, and I think I know why. I think what a lot of VCs are looking for, at least unconsciously, is the next Microsoft. And of course if Microsoft is your model, you shouldn't be looking for companies that hope to win by writing great software. But VCs are mistaken to look for the next Microsoft, because no startup can be the next Microsoft unless some other company is prepared to bend over at just the right moment and be the next IBM.

It's a mistake to use Microsoft as a model, because their whole culture derives from that one lucky break. Microsoft is a bad data point. If you throw them out, you find that good products do tend to win in the market. What VCs should be looking for is the next Apple, or the next Google.

I think Bill Gates knows this. What worries him about Google is not the power of their brand, but the fact that they have better hackers. [7]



Recognition

So who are the great hackers? How do you know when you meet one? That turns out to be very hard. Even hackers can't tell. I'm pretty sure now that my friend Trevor Blackwell is a great hacker. You may have read on Slashdot how he made his own Segway. The remarkable thing about this project was that he wrote all the software in one day (in Python, incidentally). For Trevor, that's par for the course. But when I first met him, I thought he was a complete idiot. He was standing in Robert Morris's office babbling at him about something or other, and I remember standing behind him making frantic gestures at Robert to shoo this nut out of his office so we could go to lunch. Robert says he misjudged Trevor at first too. Apparently when Robert first met him, Trevor had just begun a new scheme that involved writing down everything about every aspect of his life on a stack of index cards, which he carried with him everywhere. He'd also just arrived from Canada, and had a strong Canadian accent and a mullet.

The problem is compounded by the fact that hackers, despite their reputation for social obliviousness, sometimes put a good deal of effort into seeming smart. When I was in grad school I used to hang around the MIT AI Lab occasionally. It was kind of intimidating at first. Everyone there spoke so fast. But after a while I learned the trick of speaking fast. You don't have to think any faster; just use twice as many words to say everything.

With this amount of noise in the signal, it's hard to tell good hackers when you meet them. I can't tell, even now. You also can't tell from their resumes. It seems like the only way to judge a hacker is to work with him on something.

And this is the reason that high-tech areas only happen around universities. The active ingredient here is not so much the professors as the students. Startups grow up around universities because universities bring together promising young people and make them work on the same projects. The smart ones learn who the other smart ones are, and together they cook up new projects of their own.

Because you can't tell a great hacker except by working with him, hackers themselves can't tell how good they are. This is true to a degree in most fields. I've found that people who are great at something are not so much convinced of their own greatness as mystified at why everyone else seems so incompetent. The people I've met who do great work rarely think that they're doing great work. They generally feel that they're stupid and lazy, that their brain only works properly one day out of ten, and that it's only a matter of time until they're found out.

But it's particularly hard for hackers to know how good they are, because it's hard to compare their work. This is easier in most other fields. In the hundred meters, you know in 10 seconds who's fastest. Even in math there seems to be a general consensus about which problems are hard to solve, and what constitutes a good solution. But hacking is like writing. Who can say which of two novels is better? Certainly not the authors.

With hackers, at least, other hackers can tell. That's because, unlike novelists, hackers collaborate on projects. When you get to hit a few difficult problems over the net at someone, you learn pretty quickly how hard they hit them back. But hackers can't watch themselves at work. So if you ask a great hacker how good he is, he's almost certain to reply, I don't know. He's not just being modest. He really doesn't know.

And none of us know, except about people we've actually worked with. Which puts us in a weird situation: we don't know who our heroes should be. The hackers who become famous tend to become famous by random accidents of PR. Occasionally I need to give an example of a great hacker, and I never know who to use. The first names that come to mind always tend to be people I know personally, but it seems lame to use them. So, I think, maybe I should say Richard Stallman, or Linus Torvalds, or Alan Kay, or someone famous like that. But I have no idea if these guys are great hackers. I've never worked with them on anything.

If there is a Michael Jordan of hacking, no one knows, including him.



Cultivation

Finally, the question the hackers have all been wondering about: how do you become a great hacker? I don't know if it's possible to make yourself into one. But it's certainly possible to do things that make you stupid, and if you can make yourself stupid, you can probably make yourself smart too.

The key to being a good hacker may be to work on what you like. When I think about the great hackers I know, one thing they have in common is the extreme difficulty of making them work on anything they don't want to. I don't know if this is cause or effect; it may be both.

To do something well you have to love it. So to the extent you can preserve hacking as something you love, you're likely to do it well. Try to keep the sense of wonder you had about programming at age 14. If you're worried that your current job is rotting your brain, it probably is.

The best hackers tend to be smart, of course, but that's true in a lot of fields. Is there some quality that's unique to hackers? I asked some friends, and the number one thing they mentioned was curiosity. I'd always supposed that all smart people were curious; that curiosity was simply the first derivative of knowledge. But apparently hackers are particularly curious, especially about how things work. That makes sense, because programs are in effect giant descriptions of how things work.

Several friends mentioned hackers' ability to concentrate-- their ability, as one put it, to "tune out everything outside their own heads.'' I've certainly noticed this. And I've heard several hackers say that after drinking even half a beer they can't program at all. So maybe hacking does require some special ability to focus. Perhaps great hackers can load a large amount of context into their head, so that when they look at a line of code, they see not just that line but the whole program around it. John McPhee wrote that Bill Bradley's success as a basketball player was due partly to his extraordinary peripheral vision. "Perfect'' eyesight means about 47 degrees of vertical peripheral vision. Bill Bradley had 70; he could see the basket when he was looking at the floor. Maybe great hackers have some similar inborn ability. (I cheat by using a very dense language, which shrinks the court.)

This could explain the disconnect over cubicles. Maybe the people in charge of facilities, not having any concentration to shatter, have no idea that working in a cubicle feels to a hacker like having one's brain in a blender. (Whereas Bill, if the rumors of autism are true, knows all too well.)

One difference I've noticed between great hackers and smart people in general is that hackers are more politically incorrect. To the extent there is a secret handshake among good hackers, it's when they know one another well enough to express opinions that would get them stoned to death by the general public. And I can see why political incorrectness would be a useful quality in programming. Programs are very complex and, at least in the hands of good programmers, very fluid. In such situations it's helpful to have a habit of questioning assumptions.

Can you cultivate these qualities? I don't know. But you can at least not repress them. So here is my best shot at a recipe. If it is possible to make yourself into a great hacker, the way to do it may be to make the following deal with yourself: you never have to work on boring projects (unless your family will starve otherwise), and in return, you'll never allow yourself to do a half-assed job. All the great hackers I know seem to have made that deal, though perhaps none of them had any choice in the matter.

Mail Tracking Application...

Recently I have learnt a lot about sendmail & how e-mail system works on internet using sendmail & DNS records.

To my surprise, the mail tracking application which I am making it right now, got registrations from India, USA & France also. Besides myself, one user is regularly using this application from Bombay, India.

I am feeling proud of my work....Next month(After 16th August,2004) , I am going to launch the application.

Good luck to myself.... :)

Deadly Technique of SEO - How to beat Google - Why the PageRank Algorithm is a joke?

How to beat Google – Why the PageRank Algorithm is a joke -

Ever thought you might like to boost your ranking from a PageRank of 5 to 8 overnight? Would you like your site to be as popular as MSN or even Yahoo? With a little hard work, and following the example set below by VacationRentals.com, you can be amongst the most important sites on the net and beat Google at their own game.

For years Google has prided themselves on the fact that their PageRank algorithm provides democratic search results and often brags about their staff of PhD’s who continuously work to bring the most “democratic” results to the web. For about the same amount of time webmasters for obvious reasons have worked equally as hard trying to stay atop Google’s efforts to exploit the index for its own gain.

For the most part the system works pretty well. However when the stakes are high enough. Someone always finds a way to beat Google. In this article we would like to thank VacationRentals.com for showing us the way to beat Google at their own game, and get away with it, as it seems Google does not have a way to combat these tactics yet.

VacationRentals.com set out to score high for the very competitive term “vacation rentals”. Overnight they went from being at near the bottom of their category in the Google Directory to the very top. They secured the #3 position for their most competitive term (vacation rentals) and they have also been able to successfully beat Google at many other keywords. How did they do it? It’s all in understanding PageRank and how to manipulate and manufacture incoming links and thus site popularity.

The bottom line is that the more incoming links you have the better. Now there is a lot out there on the Internet on how to boost your link popularity. You can trade links with other webmasters, you can join link farms, you can start an associate program to name a few. But these will often only garner a few hundred incoming links. In the case of VacationRentals.com this was not enough to score a top position for their main keyword “vacation rentals”. The solution and surefire way to beat Google lay in simply manufacturing literally thousands of incoming links. It worked like a charm and for months now they have enjoyed top rankings in Google WITHOUT PENALTY. Yes, that is right folks, WITHOUT A PENALTY FROM GOOGLE.

The first thing VacationRentals.com did was to create similar websites on different IP addresses with different host names that appeared to offer unique and original content. They used differing IP addresses to help mask the fact that these sites were all on the same host from Google. For example… there main site VacationRentals.com offers vacation properties all around the globe (IP address 216.136.21.10). They then registered dozens of domain names that were tied to popular areas and built what appears to be similar sites (such as floridavacations.com, greatvacations.com, mexicovacations.com to name a few). The chart below gives an example of just a few of these sites.

Vacationrentals.com - 216.136.21.10
Floridavacations.com - 216.136.21.11
Mexicovacations.com - 216.136.21.12
1001vacationrentals.com - 216.136.21.13
hawaiianvacation.com - 216.136.21.15

On each of these sites, they linked to the home page on their main site in the footer of each page. The combined PageRank of these additional sites helped to feed the PageRank of their main site, as well as each of the satellite web sites. Operating the site in the background and then pushing out similar content on what appeared to be a different site was a sneaky way to successfully manufacture PageRank, not to mention a nice way to fool Google into widening the net for capturing traffic. This tactic has been at work for over a year with great success and NO PENALTY FROM GOOGLE FOR DUPLICATE CONTENT.

However, this tactic is hardly new… what truly sets VacationRentals.com apart from everyone else is what they did next. Vacation Rentals registered literally hundreds of domain names, most of these domain names being a popular misspelling of a likely keyword someone would type into a search. A few examples include… “peoms.com”,
”tranlate.com”, “loasangeles.com” and hundreds of others. You can do a Google back link trace to see more, there is also a list at the bottom of this article for your reference which lists a few more; however it needs to be said that the true number is unknown, it could be in the thousands.

Each of these bogus sites was then padded with what appears to be junk directory listings provided by an associate program to look like a topical search site. After the junk directory links, they created a random blob of text which is keyword rich and for the most part, complete nonsense. That is to say utter nonsense to a human being, but absolute keyword rich gold to Google which is always looking for content. An example of this bogus content can be found below from “tranlate.com”:

Snip <<<
We link up with the free translations that have the free online language translation and the translate translator with multiple languages down so the translate dutch english or the norwegian translation that gives you the gaelic translation will be very accurate. We have the online thai translation that will give you the online language translator for the hawaiian translations and many more.
>>> end snip

As you can see, the text is complete nonsense and exists for one purpose only, and that is to provide keyword rich text for Google. It works like a charm by the way.

Perhaps in their most brilliant move, and the purpose for these fake web sites… VacationRentals.com added a link at the bottom of every one which states “For more on vacation rentals click here”. These links being strategically placed include their top keyword, and when you add them up, it equates to MASSIVE MANUFACTURED INFLATED PAGERANK WITHOUT PENALTY.

By doing the above for literally hundreds of bogus domain names (maybe thousands), VacationRentals.com has to the top of the Google Index, and went from a PageRank of 5 to a whopping 8 nearly overnight.

VacationRentals.com can now count themselves among one of the most important and popular web sites on the Internet, almost as popular as Yahoo and MSN themselves. This is all in thanks to Google’s PageRank Algorithm. The funny thing about this is that when I first discovered what VacationRentals.com was doing, I thought that for sure, this would garner a penalty, and Google surely would not let such an obvious attempt to SPAM them stand, however, after months of letting it stand and awarding VacationRentals.com with ever higher PageRank. It appears the Jury is out. GOOGLE WILL NOT PENALIZE FOR THIS BEHAVIOR.

So hats off to VacationRentals.com for showing us the way to finally once and for all beat Google at their own game and make Google’s staff of PhD’s look like a misfit bunch of community college dropouts. It looks like the domain name land rush is just about to begin again!

--
as promised… a short list of the domain named mentioned above.

peoms.com/
skateboardingshoes.com/
lyricalrose.com/
priate.com/
internetcarriers.com/
thesarus.com/
singapor.com/
www.nads-hair-remover.com/
travvel.com/
hotelfinders.com/
gutair.com/
skatebord.com/
black-girls.centraltexasreunions.com/
snowbording.com/
www.orion.org/
apatmentguide.com/
internetcarriers.com/
surveilence.com/
www.internetsharingsoftware.net/
wwwpoetry.com/
thesauras.com/
www.artbuyingnetwork.com/
holtel.com/
internetacess.com/
www.hondurastravelguide.com/
securitycamers.com/
restaruants.com/
freeclasifieds.com/
internet--security.com/
www.apfelenterprises.com/
contries.com/
traveljam.net/
acclerator.com/
unemployement.com/
www.business-society.com/
www.los-angeles-hotels-booker.com/
www.classicalhitsmusic.com/
www.pianoandkeyboard.com/
teenpoems.com/
www.greatvacationhomes.com/rentals/Indonesia.html
www.activewebdevelopernewsletter.com/
www.mexicovacations.com/mx/Xcalak-Yucatan.html
www.submarinet.com/
travvel.com/
hotelfinders.com/
www.floridavacations.com/fv/De-Funiak-Florida.html
www.cdcomposer.com/
acsoftwares.com/
www.dictinoary.com/
www.internetfirewallsoftware.com/
travil.com/
lovepoerty.com/
www.brennanart.com/
www.biology-guide.com/
freeclassifed.com/
classfides.com/
gutair.com/
eletricguitars.com/
skatebord.com/
manchaster.com/
jobseach.com/
securty.com/
securitycamra.com/
www.ebusinessroadmap.org/
www.miami-hotels-booker.com/
www.citynetclassified.com/
peotry.com/
www.businessfirewallsoftware.com/
famouspoetry.com/
free-classified.net/
gutairs.com/
gutars.com/
pivate.com/
lyics.com/
sirlanka.com/
surveillence.com/
basketballpictures.com/
www.lowincomeworkingfamilies.org/
fianance.com/
apartaments.com/
lerics.com/
freedownloadmusic.com/
www.everyonesports.com/
spycamra.com/
agressiveinline.com/
inlineskateing.com/
www.precision-glassblowing.com/
pomes.com/
www.sandwichma.com/
cancoon.com/
audiosoftware.com/
aprtments.com/
skatboard.com/
penisula.com/
www.teamstirfry.com/
woodfarmersmarket.com/
accelarator.com/
survillance.com/
www.aboutenvironmentalhealth.com/
perennis.pathtoknowledge.com/
www.labgeneration.com/
dicctionary.com/
www.3-dvideo.com/
appartmentsforrent.com/
hotelssearch.com/
www.fireandicedesign.com/
home-garden-tools.com/
guitaretabs.com/
internetmarketinguk.com/
www.movingrightnow.com/
www.dtex-investigative.com/
finacialplanning.com/

Attention Windows user!!! Read this article and learn how you already use Linux also!!

Are you a part of Open Source Paradigm? Just read this little article, and you will know.

Let me ask you a simple question for this article first - "Do you use Linux?".

If your anser is "yes", you are a part of the open source & future generation, and if your anser is "no" - let me ask you another question - "Do you use Google search engine?".

If your anser is "yes" - then let me tell you the fact now - If you are using Google search engine, then you are using Google's massive complex of 100,000 Linux servers. Now, how can you deny to use Linux?

And if you have never used Google, then I am just wondering - in which century you are living - 19th or 21st?

Anyway, what I am trying to convey here is that - if you use Google & deny to use Linux, then you are just blind to the answer by a mindset in which "the software you use" is defined as the software running on the computer in front of you. This is the illusion created by your mind. So, break your mind-set it and convince yourself that everyday you are using Linux.

Keep in mind that most of the "killer apps" of the Internet, applications used by hundreds of millions of people, run on Linux or FreeBSD(Yahoo uses FreeBSD - a clone operating system of Unix). But the operating system, as formerly defined, is to these applications only a component of a larger system. Their true platform is the Internet - which is made up of many open source software such as Apache Web Server, Sendmail, Mozilla/Netscape browser, Perl/PHP/Python language etc.

What I am trying to convince you here is - If you are using Internet, then you are already a part of open source paradign shift.

Its just that you are still using Microsoft Windows operating system on your desktop, and don't think about other world which revolve around you.

Do you like this article? Want to learn more about "Open SOurce Technologies"??? Let me know...

You can read more detailed article at: http://tim.oreilly.com/opensource/paradigmshift_0504.html

101 things that the Mozilla browser can do that IE cannot!!!

Since last few days I am working on a customized browser using Java.

We are using Jrex - Java component for Mozilla browser.

I am now becoming a BIG fan of Mozilla..Read this nice article about Mozilla

More info of mozilla available at Mozilla Site

Online International Export Import Fraud

If anyone who wants to be careful while doing international export import business, you should read this page at http://www.exportbureau.com.

Very useful information available on this site.

Can MD5 be cracked???

So far, I believed, the answer is -"NO"...But my surprise, the answer is "Yes" now....

Its really great to know that an online service exists to crack a MD5 password.

So far, we used to use MD5 to store user's password in the database, so that even if someone gets access of database he/she cannot get hold of user's password, because MD5 is only one way encryption.

This is quite interetsing to know that even one way encryption algorithm can be cracked.

They are using RainbowCrack algorithm or something.

More details at:
Pass Word Cracking Service

Future of Job? one or many?

Its 3rd July. Yesterday was 2nd July - my mom completed 31 years working in a Bank of India. This is one & only one job my mom is having since she started her job. Isn't it amazing???

Its really great to be with only 1 institute for such a long time.

I am sure no one in future will have this kind of long & steady job. I am sure the future of job is "many"!!!