 |
 |
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 want—covers from > Google—without 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. - Godmar