Computing desk
< August 4	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 6 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

August 5[edit]

Malware from download.cnet.com[edit]

When getting software there, it gives you an installer to download and run. Running the installer opens a box that tries to get you to agree to extra programs with fine print and an obscured "decline" button. But, does just clicking the installer to bring up that box install malware? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:53, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably more likely to be adware or spyware than genuine malware - see CNET#Adware (edit: better link is Download.com#Adware) - but in any case I would avoid installing it if possible. There's usually a "Direct Download Link" in small print under the flashy buttons that will just give you the setup program of the application you're downloading. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 09:37, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmmm. Thanks for the link. I actually read that earlier.

Just to be clear, I downloaded an installer and ran it. Doing so popped up a box that ask to install something extra. I clicked no and then continue. It then downloaded the program I wanted from their site. Then it popped up a new box saying download complete and it's ready to install the program. That's as far as I went.

So, my question is, could the installer, upon clicking it right at the beginning, before the box even appeared, quietly have installed something nasty? Is everyone only referring to the installer offering something and hoping people don't pay attention and click agree? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:42, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone is talking about the visible "offers". It could install something secretly, but that would likely be illegal or at least cause such a backlash against the service that it would stop being profitable. Even as it is, I don't understand why anyone would use it. Freeware programs usually have official web sites from which you can download them safely (though you still have to watch out for fake download buttons).

For what it's worth, I once ran the download.com installer in a sandbox to see what it would do. I said no to everything and it did install only the program I'd originally asked for. But I'd still recommend avoiding download.com and any similar sites. -- BenRG (talk) 20:39, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A question[edit]

This question is about wiki templates. I want to know how to not show a parameter at all if it is not specified. Basically, I'm trying to create my own {{cite web}} template for my own wiki, but I only want the {{{author}}}, {{{first}}}, {{{last}}} parameters to show if they have content. If you could show me how that could be done, that would be great. Reflinks user (talk) 09:52, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Page expiry[edit]

Why do Wikipedia pages expire so quickly? I cannot finish edits sometimes because of this. This has been happening for about two weeks now. Is it something to do with the setttings on my laptop or internet connection? I have wi-fi and IE11 and Windows 7. --P123ct1 (talk) 13:24, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A workaround is to edit offline. That is, click Edit, copy the existing text over to a word processor, do all you edits there, then copy it back over to Wikipedia to save it. That way, you only need the 2nd edit session to last as long as it takes to paste in your text and hit Save. This also reduces the chances of an edit conflict, although you might replace somebody else's changes, if they occur between your 1st and 2nd edits.. StuRat (talk) 14:44, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good advice, thanks. Has anyone else noticed the pages expiring more quickly than usual, or is it my connections? --P123ct1 (talk) 13:53, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Facebook Feed Scrolling Problem[edit]

This problem has bugged me for ages. When (using Firefox) I scroll down the feed, I will get to a certain point, the scrolling will pause, then suddenly jump forward and miss out maybe a dozen or so feeds, so I have to scroll back up again to look through them. Is there any way to stop this auto-load feature? This happens on ALL of my computers, so it can't be a problem at this end. KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (Chin Wag) 14:05, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'd asked about similar issues with page loading before, and the consensus seemed to be that I just have to wait for the page to completely load before attempting to do anything with it, even scrolling. They basically need to rewrite the software to load things in the proper order, give higher priority to scrolling so it isn't interrupted, and not "save up" all your scrolling requests and other missed events, then execute them all at once. (A faster PC and internet connection will help, but presumably no matter how fast it is people will still make huge web pages full of embedded animation, etc., so that it slows things down to a scroll.) StuRat (talk) 14:40, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

why isn't water cooling mainstream?[edit]

it seems like a relatively simple mechanical problem, you'd think by now some manufacturer would have made water cooled 'heatsinks' with a high reputation of not leaking, and (being simple mechanics) cheap enough to include on even a $35 board - mechanically speaking, you can do a lot with $1 of stuff at scale. (think of faucets, shower heads, plastic water pistols etc).

so why isn't water cooling mainstream? it doesn't seem to have any downsides versus a loud fan except for having to be designed (a fan is dead simple and basically can't be wrong) but by now wouldn't someone have done it? why don't apple computers use them for example, since their r&d budget is absolutely huge. (look at retina displays, battery tech and enclosure form, etc - water cooling would seem simple compared to what's in a macbook already.)

thanks for any info! 212.96.61.236 (talk) 18:22, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My guess is simply cost vs benefit. A fan and a chunk of aluminum is always going to be cheaper then a fan, a radiator, a reservoir, a water pump, a more complicated heat block, all the connections to hook them together, etc... The benefit, in particular these days with cooler CPUs, is really very minimal, with the only exception being if you plan to aggressively overclock, which companies like apple would never do since it usually voids the CPU warranty. Vespine (talk) 23:55, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another point is that consumer-grade water cooling usually comes without warranty, even in cases where it is illegal to sell items without warranty (for example, in the EU).

But without dwelling any more on the legal aspects: if it's so unreliable that they can't afford warranty, it's certainly not reliable enough for 99% of the end users. - ¡Ouch! (^{hurt me} / _{more pain}) 07:55, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

water must be enclosed into some other material, and it's heavier than alu. At least for laptops, it doesn't looks like a good solution.OsmanRF34 (talk) 22:14, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And just to add an anecdote, Apple DID used to offer factory water cooling on their high end power macs. My neighbor had one, which eventually leaked and ruined itself outside of the warranty period. Vespine (talk) 01:48, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your neighbor must be a hipster or something, with water running all over his/her mobo before it was cool... or was it a "mainstream" of water? - ¡Ouch! (^{hurt me} / _{more pain}) 10:16, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Um, once the water has cooled the CPU, how is the (now warm) water itself cooled? DuncanHill (talk) 11:59, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jim.henderson (talk) 12:04, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The main advantage of watercooling (big radiator with large, quiet fan) can be obtained by using heatpipes instead, and heatpipes are sealed, leak-proof, have fewer moving parts, and are much simpler for the end user than water cooling. --Carnildo (talk) 03:12, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Computer Programmers[edit]

Do computer programmers wear pants? 31.51.167.131 (talk) 23:22, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not right now. I'm wearing shorts. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 23:40, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Female programmers sometimes wear pants and sometimes wear skirts or dresses. However, does the question have anything to do with computing, or only with the people who do it? Robert McClenon (talk) 23:55, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

American-English "pants" or British-English "pants"? —Nelson Ricardo (talk) 03:05, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]