User talk:LU
From CastleCopsWiki
Contents |
[edit] Lists of ...antikeyloggers
A spammer attempting to be clever. Thanks for pointing this out. --Ikester 11:25, 24 June 2007 (EDT)
[edit] Congrats
I see you have received a Security Wizard awarded by Agnitum. Congrats, LU. I am glad you have recived recognition for your work.--Negster22 11:40, 8 July 2007 (EDT)
- It isn't a CastleCops Staff position, but it's better than nothing right? --LU 07:36, 9 July 2007 (EDT)
[edit] Use of CCW as personal web space
LU wrote:
| Thanks CC for allowing me to use this Wiki like my personal webpage! |
Not a problem ... as long as it's security related, certainly. Even if you wish to cover some hobby or other, I don't foresee any issue, so long as the content meets CC AUP conditions. Feel free to create pages in your userspace (in the form "<username>/<pagename>"). Such pages will be treated as your own (i.e. not to be edited by others). --Ikester 13:00, 12 July 2007 (EDT)
[edit] Published papers
LU wrote:
| I'm also a published author of 2 papers on Wikipedia and Wikis in a top ranked peer reviewed journal. |
Good stuff! Got some links? ;) --Ikester 13:46, 29 July 2007 (EDT)
- lol it's crap really, but my supervisor insisted we submit in the top journal in the field. I'm astonished they got through the peer review process without much of a problem. I just got lucky. very lucky. And "published" might be stretching the truth a bit, they are "recommended for publication" by the three referees but not published yet... Note: for my next paper I might choose to study this wiki.. You have being warned.. lol :) --LU 15:11, 30 July 2007 (EDT)
- So no links at this point? What's the subject matter? --Ikester 23:46, 30 July 2007 (EDT)
- The subject matter after stripping all the academic talk is the validation of different trust metrics of pages or segments within pages. You know, trying to decide how trustworthy or accurate a certain wiki article is based on various factors such as number of total edits, editor reputation, age of page (or text segment), number of inbound links and so on so forth. Nothing a dozen of other articles have not already done, except one presents a relatively new methodological approach. Hmm I should try running the model on CC wiki just for fun. No doubt, LU will end up with the highest reputation...Which tell me the model sucks. lol. I'm not sure if I want to post a direct link , you need to be subscribed to access it anyway so that would be pointless. --LU 04:10, 4 August 2007 (EDT)
- Sounds intriguing! Have you run it on WikiPedia? You should run it on CCW. It would be of interest ... even if just to the admittedly limited number of contributors here. BTW, got any links to those other articles? --Ikester 14:29, 4 August 2007 (EDT)
- The model was indeed validated using Wikipedia. And yes there is very little point in running it here even without the problem of small article size due to different policies and cultural norms. Somewhat interesting about this wiki is probably the heavy use of group membership, it would be interesting to compare between such a closed membership and a more open wikipedia like organization .... And BTW the papers are formally accepted and I signed over copyrights to the journal today :D --LU 01:32, 9 August 2007 (EDT)
- Sounds intriguing! Have you run it on WikiPedia? You should run it on CCW. It would be of interest ... even if just to the admittedly limited number of contributors here. BTW, got any links to those other articles? --Ikester 14:29, 4 August 2007 (EDT)
- The subject matter after stripping all the academic talk is the validation of different trust metrics of pages or segments within pages. You know, trying to decide how trustworthy or accurate a certain wiki article is based on various factors such as number of total edits, editor reputation, age of page (or text segment), number of inbound links and so on so forth. Nothing a dozen of other articles have not already done, except one presents a relatively new methodological approach. Hmm I should try running the model on CC wiki just for fun. No doubt, LU will end up with the highest reputation...Which tell me the model sucks. lol. I'm not sure if I want to post a direct link , you need to be subscribed to access it anyway so that would be pointless. --LU 04:10, 4 August 2007 (EDT)
- So no links at this point? What's the subject matter? --Ikester 23:46, 30 July 2007 (EDT)
[edit] AntiVirus features
I'm wondering why you removed all content from this page. --Ikester 12:45, 12 September 2007 (EDT)
[edit] AVG antivirus
I did not see any comment on the AVG program. I have been using this for a while now and I find that it works well. I think that yahoo email uses it in their security as well. Was just wondering what you guys thinks about this program?
Melissa S.
- Just curious, why did you post this comment on my talk page and not the talk page of some other contributor? You might want to ask your question to a expert user (hint, anyone with a castlecops staff position), I'm just a normal user like you. --LU 10:06, 7 December 2007 (EST)
[edit] blog rss feed?
does stumbleupon have rss/atom/xml feeds for each blog? I couldn't find it. --Brewt 01:19, 23 January 2008 (EST)
- It's at the very bottom of the page (at least for now). --LU 10:15, 23 January 2008 (EST)
[edit] Reduction in activity
I have started on my phd and will sadly (for me anyway, no doubt others will be having a party) have to reduce the amount of contribution on the wiki.
Hopefully, people like MrBrian will continue to help maintain the list.
I hereby give anyone interested the right to do whatever changes (including major re-organizations) they want to the list. I know that goes without saying in most wikis but this wiki isn't "most wikis"--LU 07:43, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
- Thank you for your contributions LU and best wishes with your PHD studies. Indeed hopefully others will step up to the challenge of keeping the lists current. What do you plan to be the focus of your studies? --Ikester 09:01, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
