On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 11:13 AM, Tim Spalding <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > limits. I don't think it's a strict hits-per-day, I think it's heuristic
> > software meant to stop exactly what we'd be trying to do, server-side
> > machine-based access.
> Aren't we still talking about covers? I see *no* reason to go
> server-side on that. Browser-side gets you what you wantócovers from
> Googleówithout the risk they'll shut you down over overuse.
But Peter's experience says otherwise, no?
His computer was shut down during development - I don't see how Google
would tell his use from the use of someone doing research using a
library catalog. Especially if NAT is used with a substantial number
of users as in Giles's use case.