HNHacker News
TopNewBestAskShowJobs

feelin_googley

1,160 karma · joined May 14, 2016

submissionscomments
feelin_googley··on Linux v4.15: Performance Goodies
"Is there a plaintext version..."

Yes. But you have to make it yourself from some XML. Example of a script to do that (^M means insert a CR. Ctrl-V then Ctrl-M. Or just \r if you are using a GNU sed):

     #!/bin/sh 

     test $# -gt 0||exec echo usage: $0 proto://nameofBloggerblog.domain.tld;

     HTTPCLIENT=curl;# popular example only, not an endorsement of cURL;

     HTMLBROWSER=firefox;#popular example only, not an endorsement of Firefox

     a=$($HTTPCLIENT $1|exec sed 's/\\046/\&/g;s/\\46/\&/g;s/\\075/=/g;s/\\75/=/g;/targetBlogID/!d;s/.*targetBlogID=//;s/&.*//');test ${#a} -gt 0||exit;

     $HTTPCLIENT https://www.blogger.com/feeds/$a/posts/default|exec sed 's/^[0-9a-f]*^M//;s/&lt;/</g;s/&gt;/>/g;s/&amp;/\&/g;s/&quot;/\"/g;1i\
     <br><br>

     s/<name>/<br><br>name &/g;
     s/<uri>/<br>uri &/g;
     s/<generator>/<br>generator &/g;
     s/Blogger//;
     s/<id>/<br>id &/g;
     s/<published>/<br>published &/g;
     s/<email>/<br>email &/g;
     s/<title type=.text.>/<br><br>&/g;
     s/<openSearch:totalResults>/<br>total results &/g;
     s/<openSearch:startIndex>/<br>start index &/g;
     s/<openSearch:itemsPerPage>/<br>items per page &/g;
     s/<updated>/<br>updated &/g;
     s/<thr:total>/<br>thr:total &/g;
     s/<\/feed>/&<br><br><br>/;
     s/^M*/<br>/;
     ' |exec tr -cd '\12\40-\176' > 1.htm;

     $HTMLBROWSER file:///1.htm;
feelin_googley··on Data on 1.2M Facebook users from 2005 (2011) [use archive.org url in thread]
https://archive.org/download/oxford-2005-facebook-matrix/oxf...

Download individual files directly:

https://escience.rpi.edu/data/DA/fb100/

feelin_googley··on Data on 1.2M Facebook users from 2005 (2011) [use archive.org url in thread]
Further reading:

"Anonymised" data on internet users obtained for "research"

Relationships between industry and academia

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/22/facebook-gave-d...

Self-regulation

Patents on protecting communications (see FN 18)

https://gking.harvard.edu/files/LazPenAda09.pdf

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/09/technology/09aol.html

Data from 12 million Facebook users

"There are legal obstacles to making the data available" (see Acknowledgments)

https://www.misrc.umn.edu/wise/papers/1b-3.pdf

feelin_googley··on Cow Game Extracted Facebook Data
Another option to view the article without Javascript-powered annoyances:

   curl https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/556214/ \
   |sed -n '/<section id=\"article/{s/.ad width=/<!ad width=/g;s/<div/<!div/g;/<p>/,/<\/p>/!d;/amp-img.*cdn.theatl/{s/amp-//g;s/layout=.responsive.//;};p;}'|tr -cd '\12\40-\176' > 1.htm 


   firefox file:///1.htm ;
The file "1.htm" contains no Javascript.
feelin_googley··on Data on 1.2M Facebook users from 2005 (2011) [use archive.org url in thread]
Archived versions:

2011

http://web.archive.org/web/20110217082656/http://michaelzimm...

2018

http://web.archive.org/web/20180322184527/http://www.michael...

Dataset:

https://archive.org/details/oxford-2005-facebook-matrix

feelin_googley··on A Q&A with Mark Zuckerberg About Data Privacy
"Zuckerberg: We took action immediately at that point. We banned Kogan's app from the platform, we demanded that Kogan and Cambridge Analytica and a couple other parties that Kogan had shared the data with would legally certify that they didn't have the data, and weren't using it in any of their operations. They gave us that formal certification. At the time, they told us they never had gotten access to raw Facebook data, so we made that decision.

Zuckerberg: Yes. They gave us a formal and legal certification, and it seems at this point that that was false."

Does it matter whether CA breached some form of "agreement" with FB?

What is the consequence of that?

CA losing their FB privileges going forward?

Does that really address the harm done?

Does "formal and legal certification" mean anything if FB is not going to take legal action against CA? (Maybe FB is worried about FTC and violating their 2011 consent decree, i.e. self-preservation.)

If anyone should be requiring "formal and legal certification" that data was destroyed and that there was no unauthorized usage or transfer, it is the owners of the data: FB users.

Why are FB users upset with FB. Shouldnt they be upset with CA.

There must be a reason that there is so much focus on FB as the problem and not only on CA.

What is it?

feelin_googley··on The Legitimisation of Have I Been Pwned
The parent comment referred to "every" recipient knowing ones email address and "anyone who has hacked those recipients". The idea seems to be that all email addresses become "public". But this seems to assume things about the user and how they use the email address.

What if a user has an email address that she does not use to send mail? She does not use this account to send mail. She does not need to send reply mail. She has other email accounts she can use if she needs to send mail. If she only shares this address with one sender, then is this not at least a "semi-private" email address?

Back in the early 1990s when email accounts started to become easy to obtain, I routinely had accounts where I only received mail. I only gave these addresses to one or a few senders. I did not use these accounts to send mail.

I do not use email as avidly as I did back then, and maybe things have changed, but I would be a little surprised if today when a user sets up a new email account she starts immediately getting email1 because "all email addresses are public", before she has given this address to anyone. The address is "semi-private" unless and until the user decides to disclose it widely. She may choose not to do that.

1 Except maybe a welcome email from an email provider.

feelin_googley··on Blocklist Facebook domains
"How does that work if everyone has a hosts files?"

In your particular case, I dont know. You have to do what best suits your needs, whatever they are.

Here is how someone else solves the problem of changing IP addresses. For my needs, I actually like this method.

The entire ICANN DNS used to be bootstrapped to a small text file called "root.hints", db.cache, named.root, named.cache, or something else. As far as I know, it still is.

How does one know the IP address from which to retrieve this text file?

Maybe they have it memorized, or written down somewhere, or perhaps it is written into some DNS software default configuration. In all cases, they have this address stored locally.

No remote lookup.

What happens when the administrator of the server that publishes the text file wants to change IP addresses?

This does not happen very often, but it does happen. What do they do? Considering that the entire ICANN DNS was bootstrapped to this one file, and assuming this is truly meant to be a dynamic system, then this is arguably the most important IP address on the internet.

They notify users in advance that the IP address is going to change.

Thats it.

As a www user, of course I would have to do a DNS lookup for blahblah.com. However I do not do lookups for the server with db.cache, for the .com nameservers, and in most cases not for the nameserver for blahblah.com either, and I do not do lookups using recursive caches. If blahblah.com changes its IP address I do not have to wait for changes to propagate through the system via TTLs. I am querying the authoritative nameserver, RD bit unset. If an IP address changes from the one I have stored, I know immediately when I try to access it. (I like being aware of these changes.) If I was relying a recursive cache I would probably not notice that the IP address had changed.

IME, IP address changes happen less frequently than people writing about DNS on the web would have one believe. Hence this system works well for me. Most domainnames I encounter are keeping the same IP address for long periods.

Ideally, if blahblah.com is not changing IP addresses frequently or unexpectedly but needs to make a change, she could publish a notice somewhere on her web server informing users she will be moving to a new IP address, just like the server that serves db.cache.

feelin_googley··on The Legitimisation of Have I Been Pwned
I have seen similar comments here before that suggest all email addresses are "public information". I am not sure I understand or agree with this perspective.

What if the address was only used to receive mail, not to send it?

feelin_googley··on Blocklist Facebook domains
I have scripts and compiled utilities that transform HOSTS file to tinydns format. I use nsd as well which uses BIND format. I prefer the tinydns format.

Zone files are more flexible than HOSTS files, but I still use HOSTS as well. I have never had a concern about the speed of using HOSTS. It is certainly faster than DNS.

There is a comment in this thread where someone asserts that HOSTS was never designed to handle "millions of entries".

I would be interested in reading about a user who visits "millions" of websites or otherwise needs to do lookups on "millions" of domains.

I maintain a database of every IP address I am likely to use on a repeated basis, in several formats, with kdb+ as the "master" format. I believe most users will never come close to intentionally accessing "millions" of IP addresses in their entire lifetime.FN1 I could be mistaken and it would be interesting to learn of a user who can dispel this belief.

FN1. If you think about this, it may cause you to question the necessity of DNS for such users. Or not. Times have changed since the advent of HOSTS. They have also changed since the advent of DNS. For example, using "consumer" hardware, I can fit all the major ICANN TLD zones on external storage and the entire com zone (IMO, by far the most important) in memory. This is many, many more domains than I will ever need to look up. Assuming at best I will not live much longer than 100 years, I could not and will not explore them all or even a significant fraction.

feelin_googley··on Both Facebook and Cambridge Analytica Threatened to Sue Journalists
"Not sure why people are so hung up on the "breach" vs "not a breach" debate."

Wild guess (probably incorrect):

http://web.archive.org/web/20170205180142/https://www.foley....

feelin_googley··on Zuckerberg summoned to House Of Commons inquiry
"In a letter to Mr Zuckerberg, Mr Collins accused Facebook of giving answers "misleading to the Committee" at a previous hearing which asked whether information had been taken without users' consent.

He said it was "now time to hear from a senior Facebook executive with the sufficient authority to give an accurate account of this catastrophic failure of process".

Requesting a response to the letter by 26 March, the MP added: "Given your commitment at the start of the New Year to "fixing" Facebook, I hope that this representative will be you.""

At a previous hearing, Facebook mislead a parliamentary committee.

Committee chairman now requesting accurate account from "senior Facebook executive" with proper authority.

Chairman "hopes" that will be Zuckerberg.

Poll: Do you think Facebook will have Zuckerberg give this account, or will they assign this task to some other Facebook employee? Feel free to explain your answer.

feelin_googley··on “Pinterest needs to be removed from Google IMO”
Someone gave an example of searching for "IBM Leapfrog" and getting numerous Pinterest results.

I tried that search and only got one Pinterest result in the top 10.

I had no problem getting the text and images using a text-only browser. Could Javascript be the enabler for this Pinterest/Google annoyance?

Here is a quick little script to dump all the text from a Pinterest page; note how much is devoted to SEO and ads. .jpg URLs are wrapped in anchor tags for convenience.

    curl https://www.pinterest.com/pin/509469776569152019/ \
    |exec tr '<' '\12' \
    |exec sed 's/, \"/\
    \"/g;s/{/\
    /g;s/}/\
    /g;s/\[/\
    /g;s/\]/\
    /g;/\":/!d' \
    |exec sed '/ \"/!d;2s/^/<pre>/;
    /\.jpg\"/{s/\"/<\/pre><a href=\"/3;
    s/\"/\" style=margin:40px >viewjpg<\/a><pre>/4;};
    $s/$/<\/pre>/' > 1.htm ;

    firefox file:///1.htm ;
With respect to LinkedIn, here is an amusing experiment to test the theory that your time means nothing to some web developers: Try signing up for a temporary account with a 10-minute email address from 10minutemail.com. LinkedIn will not inform you that this is an unacceptable email address. LinkedIn will proceed to show you Google ReCaptchas for at least 10 minutes, and perhaps longer.
feelin_googley··on Virtual private networks with WireGuard
"... (whether of not you choose to include OpenSSL's line count)..."

Why does someone just assume everyone wants to use OpenSSL?

I have never intentionally chosen to use libssl or other SSL/TLS libraries and I never will. (That wont stop this person from replying to a comment that has nothing to do with SSL/TLS from telling us how we can use SSL/TLS to get whatever it is we are after.) Not gonna happen with this user.

The reason I am interested in Curve25519 is precisely because I am not interested in OpenSSL. I am interested in Curve25519 because I like the type of software the author writes.

That author writes what I consider to be relatively small, fast, portable, flexible software. The authors of OpenSSL write the sort of software I do not like to use, for a variety of reasons. There are too many to list. OpenSSL, and SSL/TLS in general, is nothing more than a PITA to me.

It is a nuisance.

I do not care if SSL libraries offer Curve25519. I was already using Curve25519 before they adopted it. I am not interested in SSL/TLS. I do not care how much anyone else likes it.

I am interested in alternatives to SSL/TLS and the prevailing web PKI. The author of Curve25519 provided prototypes for one such alternative.

I do not care what someone else thinks of these, when that person can offer zero technical analysis to support his snarky opinions. The only thing that matters to me is what I think of the software. If I like it, I use it.

I use CurveCP everyday on my own network. If somebody giving free "security advice" on a web forum has a problem with the fact I like some software, then they should take it up with the author of the software who published it.

Me, I am just a satisfied end user. I know nothing.

feelin_googley··on Virtual private networks with WireGuard
I meant the downvote and accompanying reply I got on the initial comment I made where I asked the question "How portable is WireGuard to BSD, Minix, Plan9, etc.". Even if he did not do the downvote, a comment like the one he left triggers an automatic flurry of downvotes.

He claims something about "bad security advice". But really what is going on is he is telling people what software to use again, and what software not to use.

I mention I am using some software, for a purpose he does not know (no encryption in fact required for my use) without naming the software, and he posts some inane comment about writing such software being "easy". I am not the author of the software in question, I believe he is talented software author, and I really dont care how easy it was for him to write.

What I care about is that being small in size, I can work with the source code easier. What I care about, the things about software I value, is not "security advice". Its what I care about.

Of course what he cares about, the software he chooses to endorse, is security advice. I do not care what software he likes or doesnt like. But he will not spare us his opinions. Because he is here to "give advice".

I do not endorse software. I rarely name the software I am using. I might describe it generally. While I may have different preferences and make different choices, I certainly do not try to put down other users choices in software. Other users specify software by name, providing links and wax poetic about it. The "security expert" says nothing.

I make a comment about software I am using, and the qualities of software I care about (small, portable, fast, flexible), without naming the software, and suddenly we have (as he claims) a "bad security advice" alert.

Never mind that the point of the comment is to ask if WireGuard is portable, so I can try using it.

I find the idea that someone is actively trying to indiscriminately control what software HN readers use to be insulting. If advice or recommendatons are sought, then requests for advice or recommendations will be made. But when someone is trying to supress or discredit the informed choices of users who are neither seeking (nor giving) advice then that is truly pathetic.

One would hope that reasonable persons would be above this sort of behavior.

feelin_googley··on Virtual private networks with WireGuard
Thats what you think I did? I said I was using some unnamed peer-to-peer software. I never told anyone else to mimic me. I did not even answer others who asked me to name the software. Interestingly, I never said I personally was using encryption nor did I explain how encryption might be implemented, yet you went right ahead and assumed you knew how this software worked and how I was using it, including something about "slapping some encryption on a tun/tap device".

I do not offer security advice nor do I tell people what to do or what not to do in web forums. That is what you do.

Do you hold any professional licenses? Ones that permit you to give advice? I am guessing you do not. How would someone hold you to account for receiving bad advice?

If you honestly think I am "offering security advice", then why not ask me, "You mentioned that you use some software that can (optionally) perform encryption. Are you offering security advice?"

The answer will always be "No." (I am not obsessed with security. The primary "threat model" for me is advertising and certain web developers who want to waste my time.)

I am not a "conventional" user. I do not choose software based on popularity or the opinions of others. Other HN readers are not going to follow me like some sort of pied piper, if that is what you are worried about. Especially since with a few exceptions (where I am using well-known software that is popular on HN) I am not even disclosing the "brand names" for what software I am using. Even if I did disclose, the majority of HN readers would not want to use what I am using. I make sacrafices they would not be willing to make.

It would be nice to be able to discuss software choices with other nonconventional users reading HN, but it is precisely because of commenters like yourself that unconventional users like me are better off keeping such things to themselves.

Keep up the good work.

feelin_googley··on Virtual private networks with WireGuard
The problem with your comments is they assume things about other users. You have no idea what software I use, how I verify it, how I modify it or how I use it. You have no idea what I am doing. Stop making assumptions.

If you really dont care (as would be expected) then dont downvote and comment.

If you want to use this forum to give unsolicited "advice" to readers then you can do that (easy for me to filter this out). But please do not use my comments as a launching pad for your free "advice" and "guidance".

If you want to change what software people use, why not write some software yourself and publish it?

feelin_googley··on Virtual private networks with WireGuard
1. Easy is good. Example: The entire purpose of Noise is to simplify and make things easier for people.

2. I am not "slapping some kind of encryption" on tun/tap devices. Though it would be easy to do so, I have not required "bulk encryption" for this software to be useful. IMO, the flexibility to add this, easily, is indeed a feature worth mentioning (some users might need it), but not one I need right now.

3. Small, fast, flexible and portable are software virtues most useful and therefore most important to me. What I see here in this cheap, senseless comment is the act of trying to superimpose someone other user's virtues, e.g. encryption protocols. It is trying to impose one persons goals onto another persons goals without even knowing what are the other persons goals. The usual nerd web forum nonsense.

Not all users need, or value, the same things.

The authors of Curve25519 and the peer-to-peer software I use, both academics whose software is used by security consultants, do not spend time reading and interacting with the HN peanut gallery. In fact this is true of the authors of most software I use. I think there is a reason for that. Why do I waste my time reading this garbage? (Every time I respond to it I feel like I have been suckered/duped into playing a time-wasting game.)

Because despite the garbage comments there are some interesting, unconventional end users who read HN. Not sure where else one would find this audience all checking the same website.

How "easy" it was for any of these authors I mentioned to write the software I value is mildly intriguing but truthfully not something I really care about. The fact is that they were the only ones to write it and publish it. That is what is important to me.

All of this is tangential to the question: Is Wireguard portable to BSD, Minix, Plan9, etc.?

But I guess the fact that whatever I am using, for almost 10 years before WireGuard appeared, is smaller than WireGuard has irked someone into trying to dismiss that prior software. The reason apparently is that it might have been "easy" to avoid writing a large amount of code.

It might have been easy to do for the original author, but for those 10 years, no one else did it. The alternatives chose significantly different (IMO, inferior) designs and were all much larger, stacked with "features" and complexity I did not need.

The temptation to make things complicated and larger than they need to be is irresistable for most people writing software. It takes serious effort to find authors who can resist this temptation, effort most users will not make. I make that effort and reap the rewards.

The author of the parent comment exploits that temptation and the larger number of undetected mistakes it produces as a business.

It is easy to see the competing interests and inherent biases between a user that values relatively small, simple software and a security consultant who needs relatively large, complex software (the norm) to continue to exist in order to stay in business.

feelin_googley··on Virtual private networks with WireGuard
I fail to see how the "obviousness" of the software I choose to use has anything to do with the simple question I posed: Is WireGuard portable?

The fundamental idea of using /dev/tap to accomplish peer-to-peer networking goes back further than when this software was written and further back than Curve25519. Who cares? This is a silly tangent.

The point about clairvoyance is that one cannot criticise software just because it uses /dev/tap. One needs to know much more than that. He does not know what software it is I am using, only that I'm not using WireGuard (yet). He does not know how I am using it, what changes I have made or what my particular needs are as a user. But it seems he wants to put down someone else's choice of (undisclosed) software and elevate his own choice, as a WireGuard user.

I have seen this sort of "commentary" before, too many times. The need to tell others what software is good, bad, what they should or should not use, etc. This is done unsolicited, without knowing anything about the users particular needs and use cases, without providing detailed technical reasons for their opinions, and at least with this particular user, it is often worded in some ridiculous didactic style. To be clear, I am referring to countless posts by this particular member over many years to the aggravation of other users, not simply the one comment in this thread.

There are reasons I try to avoid naming software; one is because of commentary like this, by HN members eager to criticize others' software choices without any justification.

I am really tired of this sort of commentary and the childish attitude it represents.

Trust me when I say that the details of the design of the software I am using are unique amongst the open source Layer 2 alternatives. While they are all perhaps obvious and easy to implement, they have not been selected by the alternatives, for whatever reasons. I sincerely doubt one could guess the details of this design, let alone the code itself, just from my mentioning it includes a userspace program utilising /dev/tap. And even if they could, who cares? This is a useless tangent.

The question was: Is WireGuard portable?

Apologies to anyone reading this for the distraction I inadvertently triggered.

Focus should be on WireGuard.

feelin_googley··on Virtual private networks with WireGuard
Thank you. It sounds like portability may come via a userspace program. I look forward to it.
feelin_googley··on Virtual private networks with WireGuard
FWIW, that is not what I use.

I should have not mentioned anything about other software. It is irrelevant to the question.

The question was/is: How portable is WireGuard?

feelin_googley··on Virtual private networks with WireGuard
I use one of the many non-OpenVPN "VPN" alternatives. The one I chose has fewer lines/words/characters of code than Wireguard.

It does not require SSL/TLS, it can use Curve25519 and it is faster than OpenVPN.

It is a userland daemon (using /dev/tap), so it may be slower than Wireguard.

However I think it is more portable than WireGuard. (That is an important feature to me.)

How portable is WireGuard to BSD, Minix, Plan9, etc?

feelin_googley··on Ferro – Simplifying web development, no more HTML
For those users who choose to disable Javascript or choose browsers that have no Javascript engine:

    curl https://easydatawarehousing.github.io/ferro/main_content.json \
    |exec sed '/{\"/{s/{\"/<pre>\
    \
    &/g;s/,\"/\
    &/g;s/\content\":\"/&\
    \
    <\/pre>/g;};s/\"}/&\
    \
    /g;s/\\u0026/\&/g'|exec unvis -h > 1.htm
    
    exec firefox file:///1.htm
feelin_googley··on Facebook Really Is Spying on You, Just Not Through Your Phone's Mic
Is there any reason that pinning should not be optional?

In other words, any reason that the user should not be able to "disable" it? (Use own root CA.)

Consider that in this case, the data being transferred to Facebook belongs to the user.

Is it unreasonable for a user to require that they be able to see what data is being transferred before they agree to transfer it?

feelin_googley··on APL Style: Patterns/Anti-patterns
Corrections: 1. remove "echo" from line #2; 2. add " -v" after "curl" in line #2 so one can see occasional 403 errors.
feelin_googley··on History of the browser user-agent string (2008)
More cache urls

http://web.archive.org/web/20180306011516/https://webaim.org...

https://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=http://webaim.org/blog/use...

https://archive.is/mJg8G

https://88h6obas83.execute-api.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/dev/p...

The last one returns JSON

feelin_googley··on Facebook’s tracking of non-users ruled illegal again in Europe
This comment suggests Facebooks ability to "grow their business" via third-party hosted beacons, etc. relies on users not editing their /etc/hosts files. (or on not changing the DNS settings on their mobile device to use a nameserver that blocks Facebook domains)

How much "brightness" is required to carry out such a strategy? If millions of users followed step 2 (or blocked Facebook domains through another means), what would happen? How would the "brightest minds" respond?

feelin_googley··on Make Medium Readable Again
Medium looks fine in a text-only browser such as links. Better than most websites in fact.
feelin_googley··on APL Style: Patterns/Anti-patterns
For those who do not use Javascript in the browser, here is another source of the presentation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xCJ3BCIudI

Lots of good commentary not in the slides.

And here is a way to download the video without Javascript. I have been meaning to try to rewrite this in k.

     #  Notes
     #  Works by brute force and has been reliable for years
     #  Was easily updated when YouTube made changes (rare)
     #  Zero dependencies except tr, sed and an https client
     #  Takes a YouTube URL on stdin  
     #  Example usage: 
     #  echo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xCJ3BCIudI|ytd 22 file
     #  "ytd" is name of the script
     #  "22" is itag-no in this case large mp4 ("18" is smaller mp4) 
     #  "file" is optional filename, no extension required
     #  if no filename given video is saved as "1.mp4"
     #  UNIX-like: url-filter < file-containing-url|ytd 22 
     #  Caution when copying and pasting: line 2 needs to retain the 4 space indent
     #  N.B. Will not work with restricted videos; *this is not for downloading music or other commercial crap*; use youtube-download if thats what you are after
     #  N.B. Some videos may require a few tries, most will work on the first try; if get 403 try again
      
    #!/bin/sh 
    case $# in [123]);;*)exec echo usage: $0 itag-no \[file\];esac;a=$(exec sed 's/http:/https:/;s/m.youtube/www.youtube/;s/youtu.be./www.youtube.com\/watch?v=/;s/hooktube.com/youtube.com/;s/embed./watch?v=/;#etc.;s/?version.*//;s/;.*//'); n=0;while true;do b=$(curl $a|exec tr -cd '\12\40-\176'|exec sed 's/https%3A/\
        &/g;s/ *//;/   https%3A%2F%2F/!d;s/%3A/:/g;s/%2C/,/g;s/%2F/\//g;s/%3D/=/g; s/%3B/;/g;s/%3F/?/g;s/%26/\&/g;s/\\u0026/\&/g;s/%252C/,/g;s/%252F/\//g;s/%22/\"/g; s/%255B/[/g;s/%255D/]/g;'|exec sed '/itag='"$1"'/!d;/video.mp4/!d;/webm/d;/ytplayer/d;s/;+codecs.*//;s/&xtags.*//;/timedtext/d;s/&itag=..//2');test ${#b} = 0||break;test $n -le 9||exit;n=$((n+1));done;case $1 in 18|22)ext=mp4;esac;exec echo curl $3 -4o ${2-1}.$ext $b;
feelin_googley··on PhantomJS: Archiving the project, suspending development
Is this the data you were trying to parse?

https://www.cooperativepatentclassification.org/Archive.html

← PreviousPage 5 of 15Next →