On Wed, 16 May 2007 04:53:24 +0200, from at
fu3.org wrote:
Nothing to apologize about :)
What is it based on; --any idea how
"accurate" this is?
"Based on", WoW that is a wide subject ....
This project started out as a utility lookup.lsp I wrote some time back as a personal
tool, it took a search string
and feed it to a handful of search engines, and compiled the returns into a single tiny
page I could look at on my cell
phone. I used it to lookup the current "usage" of domain and product names as
well as a prefetch search tool.
The project took a turn in march when I decided to modify it to attempt to figure out the
overall size of the known or at least
indexed world of the internet. It been slowly evolving over time unideal early april when
using lookup7 I discovered that the
the 5 search engines I chose to track and use as my reference sources could be spell out
YGAMS on my cell phone
screen and
YGAMS.COM had not only not been registered. The best part was that it had a
"gamy" (the proposed name at
the time) value of 0. Other than a few misspellings of YGAMES YGAMS had an internet
present of Zip, nada, Zero... Too
cool to pass up, so lookup.lsp got a face lift and
YGAMS.COM was born. A conversation with
a math guy, confirmed my
math was as good, and I began to calculate and log the daily average size of the indexed
world. Using this overall average I
built a weighting system, which I apply to the results of each search, to produce the
current YGAMS number. At that point
YGAMS was text only and ran mostly on my cell phone.
Upon returning from my annual trip into tax hell, I addressed the problems of charting
YGAMS related info to my cell phone.
I decided to try a pure HTML approach based on tables, I liked the idea that it did not
require the generation or display of
any image or file other than the pure HTML being generated and returned directly from the
evaluation of a control lists.
http://ygams.com/ygams.lsp?info was the first chart I started with. Followed in a few days
by
http://ygams.com/ygams.lsp?scores when I figured out how to stack backgrounds in a table
cell.
Early May, I set up a caching system and began generating what I will call the game charts
I am playing with now. Which
raises your second question ...
--any idea how "accurate" this is?
I can say the math and logic is all mine. Every YGAMS goes through the same analysis
process and is scaled based the
same normalization and based on what I like to think of as the normalized size of the
internet today. The resulting number
is not as important as the relationship of theindex indicators used as daily references to
each other. I was supprised just
how much Yahoo Google Ask, MSN, and
Search.com search results changed from day to day as
the spiders drop and
reindex several billion of pages a day between them.
It is still a work in progress ...
Bob Bradlee
2007/5/16, Bob Bradlee <caveguy at
sbcglobal.net>:
> OOPS .... MY Bad !
>
http://ygams.com/ygams.lsp?Switchtech is fixed now.
> I had rolled back some changes I made today, I was in a hurry and forgot to restore
one of the include
> files that I had also changed. Function DoMtype's parameters had been changed
from a list to a string
> between versions, thus the error message you were seeing. It looked and worked just
fine here, untill I
> cleared my cookies, and then it blew it's cookies just like it did for every one
new to the site.
>
> Bob
>
> On Wed, 16 May 2007 02:05:30 +0200, from at
fu3.org wrote:
>
> >..nor SeaMonkey, which is Gecko-based also. (I mean; I get the same
> >output as parent..)
>
> >15 May 2007 16:57:44 -0700, Geoff Reed <geoffr at zipcon.net>:
> >> Quoting Bob Bradlee <caveguy at sbcglobal.net>:
> >>
> >> > I had not planned to sent that one untill I could edit it a bit :(
> >> >
> >> > Here is a link to a ygam chart I generated for that mutterings and it
> >> > includes
> >> > a link to the page.
> >> >
> >> >
http://ygams.com/ygams.lsp?Switchtech
> >> >
> >> > Bob
> >>
> >>
> >> list expected in function dolist : pcist
> >>
> >> called from user defined function DoMtype
> >>
> >> doe it not like Firefox?
> >>
>
>
>