bigfellascott wrote:It was the Anniversary of P.A. yesterday and I didn't hear boo about it - that's a nice change.
Wylie27 wrote:bigfellascott wrote:It was the Anniversary of P.A. yesterday and I didn't hear boo about it - that's a nice change.
Wow bfs I didn't even realise. That was a nice change
pete1 wrote:So heres a idea if we all visited Gun Control Australia's website at one it would crash wouldn't it? I'm not a computer expert. It's not illegal either all where doing is going to view lies at the same time and poor statistical analysis.
Nothing to see here, move along!
01101000 01110100 01110100 01110000 01110011 00111010 00101111 00101111 01100101 01101110 00101110 01110111 01101001 01101011 01101001 01110000 01100101 01100100 01101001 01100001 00101110 01101111 01110010 01100111 00101111 01110111 01101001 01101011 01101001 00101111 01001100 01101111 01110111 01011111 01001111 01110010 01100010 01101001 01110100 01011111 01001001 01101111 01101110 01011111 01000011 01100001 01101110 01101110 01101111 01101110
01110000 01101100 01100101 01100001 01110011 01100101 00100000 01100100 01101111 01101110 00100111 01110100 00100000 01100010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01101101 01100101 00101100 00100000 01001001 00100111 01101101 00100000 01101010 01110101 01110011 01110100 00100000 01110100 01110010 01111001 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01100100 01100101 01101101 01101111 01101110 01110011 01110100 01110010 01100001 01110100 01100101 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100110 01110101 01110100 01101001 01101100 01100101 00100000 01100001 01110100 01110100 01100101 01101101 01110000 01110100 00100000 00111010 00101001
Fritz wrote:pete1 wrote:So heres a idea if we all visited Gun Control Australia's website at one it would crash wouldn't it? I'm not a computer expert. It's not illegal either all where doing is going to view lies at the same time and poor statistical analysis.
Technically yes. BUT, you would need a LOT of people to visit at once before the computer says no.
This would be a DDOS attack (Distributed denial of service attack) and in the case of the GCA website would really be a waste of time. The down time wouldn't be for that long before the server reassigns resources to combat the attack.
I think in reality, you would need 10's of thousands of visits per minute, for hours or days to really do some damage. The thing is, that "Damage" would be denying service for legitimate visitors to see the page, and you must ask yourself this... How many "legitimate visitors" do they actually get??
Deploying mass resources for a DDOS attack just to stop a handful of people (if that) just isn't worth it as the effects would only be temporary.Nothing to see here, move along!
01101000 01110100 01110100 01110000 01110011 00111010 00101111 00101111 01100101 01101110 00101110 01110111 01101001 01101011 01101001 01110000 01100101 01100100 01101001 01100001 00101110 01101111 01110010 01100111 00101111 01110111 01101001 01101011 01101001 00101111 01001100 01101111 01110111 01011111 01001111 01110010 01100010 01101001 01110100 01011111 01001001 01101111 01101110 01011111 01000011 01100001 01101110 01101110 01101111 01101110
Not trying to kill your idea. I know exactly where you're coming from. Looking at some of the crap on their website and in the media just infuriates me to no end.
All that head banging got me thinking as well, and I did have an idea, that unlike a temporary DDOS attack, that idea would be a permanent blow to their "views". Unfortunately this one is about as illegal as a DDOS attack (if performed in this country). I may have stepped over the line a little with my binary (my bad) so will absolutely will not go into detail on a public forum, or probably not at all. Maybe one day I may look into it but not right now01110000 01101100 01100101 01100001 01110011 01100101 00100000 01100100 01101111 01101110 00100111 01110100 00100000 01100010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01101101 01100101 00101100 00100000 01001001 00100111 01101101 00100000 01101010 01110101 01110011 01110100 00100000 01110100 01110010 01111001 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01100100 01100101 01101101 01101111 01101110 01110011 01110100 01110010 01100001 01110100 01100101 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100110 01110101 01110100 01101001 01101100 01100101 00100000 01100001 01110100 01110100 01100101 01101101 01110000 01110100 00100000 00111010 00101001
bladeracer wrote:I think a much better, simpler, more effective, and legal option would be to set up a site called "Gun Control Australia" focused on precision shooting. It should rapidly push theirs to the bottom of the Google Search Engine.
Title_II wrote:If you carry a fun in Australia you will go to jail.
Heckler303 wrote:bladeracer wrote:I think a much better, simpler, more effective, and legal option would be to set up a site called "Gun Control Australia" focused on precision shooting. It should rapidly push theirs to the bottom of the Google Search Engine.
That would be a better idea, however I feel they may try to pull copywright even though as far as I know personally they have no name patent.
That and the fact they can't remember copywright protection to save themselves. Like that joinup between me and Steve Lee to pull down their video for tighter handgun control. They used his footage without amy credit and because they couldnt deny the copywright claim, off it went.
Ratsmitglied wrote:Trademark is registering the name, copyright is a different kettle of fish, still under the umbrella of intellectual property though
So i don't see that there would be too many difficulties in co-opting the phrase, problem comes to trying to influence search results, and that is a black box...
bladeracer wrote:
I would assume it hinges on site traffic? And perhaps relevance to the search query? So having lots of instances of the phrase throughout the site should also affect it?
If our site contains actual information about precision shooting plus links out to many other pages firearm related then traffic should be far higher than their site gets.
There could even be a "Jokes" page linking to GCA, The Greens, The RSPCA, Labor Party and such
Ratsmitglied wrote:Most search engines don't reveal their algorithms for page rank, but occurrence of the search terms is one small bit of it now, convincing them you are a trusted source is one, and with Google making sure you are mobile friendly helps, links out and back to you from other trusted sites also helps...
And then you have the human element, as anything can be manipulated manually
WatchyShooter wrote:Just a google of GCA shows how inept they are, onto the 2nd page and still nothing.
Type in SSAA or IPSC and see how relevant the results are.
That's what GCA is now, irrelevant, they've been fudging their member numbers for years now, they're running out of steam and that's the best time for us to act.
Share SSAA posts on your Facebook, LDP, shooters unions, anything that supports us, start trying to get people at the range onto forums like this to help us actually pull together and fight for our rights.
doc wrote:LOL guncontrolaustralia.com is currently available for registration. It's an international domain (ie, not .au) so you don't need an ABN/Organisation/etc registration to register it - anyone can.
(I'm betting that it won't be available by the time I check again tomorrow)...
I like the idea of creating a website with the same name (at least for someone who knows what they're doing ) - and putting actual facts on their that prove the lies of GCA themselves. Great idea blaceracer!
Gwion wrote:doc wrote:LOL guncontrolaustralia.com is currently available for registration. It's an international domain (ie, not .au) so you don't need an ABN/Organisation/etc registration to register it - anyone can.
(I'm betting that it won't be available by the time I check again tomorrow)...
I like the idea of creating a website with the same name (at least for someone who knows what they're doing ) - and putting actual facts on their that prove the lies of GCA themselves. Great idea blaceracer!
If i wasn't already paying fees on 5 domains i would jump on this!