Slashdot Mirror
AOL To Open AIM Protocol?
Vintage was the first person to write with the word from Betanews that AOL will be opening their Instant Messenger Protocol up. The comment from Betanews is that this may be part of an attempt to appease the FTC in regards to the AOL-TimeWarner merger.
If I set up a server that uses a proprietary protocol (think trade secret here), what gives you the right to connect to my server with your program?
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
TiK, the client of which you speak is available at sourceforge
It works well. I've been playing with gabber, a gtk jabber client, thats pretty cool too.
ICQ has got to be one of the worst put together pieces of software in general use. On a lot of people's machines it takes longer to load ICQ then it does to boot windows. What the hell is taking so long?
The interface is just terrible, here's just one example: If you want to do an operation on a user name, you pull up a menu. In most windows programs, using the right mouse button causes a context menu. But not in ICQ. In ICQ you can switch it. Clicking on the other mouse button causes I dialog box asking if you want to switch them (complete with a big bitmap of a mouse).
What the hell is that?? If there's only one single click operation why not just make **BOTH** mouse buttons do it? Instead of having the other one pull up the stupid "would you like to switch mouse buttons" dialog???
The whole thing is chunky, the interface sucks ass... it's just bad software.
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
"and dear god does this website suck now." -- CmdrTaco
Here is the page announcing the proposal, with links to the proposal itself (a formal Internet Draft and this diagram showing the client/server and server/server architecture.
Stupid job ads, weird spam, occasional insight at
This is just a temporary appeasement by AOL to deflect scrutiny until the merger goes through. "Opening" the protocol isn't functionally any different than having everyone reverse engineer it. Just because it's "open" doesn't mean they can't or won't start mutating it again every 3 days once the merger goes through. My money is on a rapid return to this anti-competitive practice the instant the merger is complete.
Opening it up permanently is WAY too forward-thinking for AOL/TW; I think companies that size are prevented by law from making any decision that sacrifices present monopoly for long-term viability. They're only allowed to consider the current quarter, I think that's an SEC regulation.
Sure, Jesse Berst ranted about it. AOL keeping it closed stops Microsoft from getting to use AOL's capital investments for free, and Microsoft (through ads) pays Jesse Berst's salary.
Steven E. Ehrbar
A lot of exciting things are happening on the jabber front. As I type this, developers are finishing up a proposal to the ITEF to make Jabber a standard. You can check it out at core.jabber.org Also check out jabber.org (general site), jabber.com (for businesses), and jabbercentral.com (for end-users).
AOL has submitted it's IMX draft to the IETF and it is available on the Internet at http://aim.aol.com/openim.
Correct. TOC doesnt allow most of the features as OSCAR. They did, in recent versions, implement password changing, screen name reformatting, file receive, and it looks like the skeleton of sending files. You can also send a file if an OSCAR user sends you a request for a file. Cheers.
---
---
Rob Flynn
Pidgin
I mean does anyone really use this chat stuff, besides horny 14 year-olds, 45 year-old pedophiles, and cops pretending to be Natalie Portman?
--
...that after the AIM protocol is opened, that AOL will suddenly be flooded with clueless newbies?
Gaim actually uses OSCAR; if my history is correct, a client called faim (free aim) reverse engineered the protocol, and then made libfaim for use by other clients. gaim uses libfaim.
There is actually an AIM client written in Tcl/Tk and based on the Tik release from America Online. It runs on any system that supports Tcl/Tk.
MiniTik AOL Instant Messenger Client
___________
If we had such a client, we could run our own IM network
That's easy. Just take some code from a common IRC client and add it to EveryBuddy. Any takers?
Will I retire or break 10K?
In fact, with minimal additions, IRC could be the basis for a global, distributed IM system.
That would be a really good idea. Perhaps somebody could hack something into Everybuddy to send private messages over IRC. Of course, there would have to be a special channel with a bot that manages buddy notification.
Will I retire or break 10K?
AOL has posted an Internet Draft on their proposed IM protocol. It is very similar in overall concept to the e-mail system - similarities such as introducing a new "IMX" record into DNS, the use of MIME as a message format, and providing each user with a unique myname@mydomain identifier, are some of the more obvious. It differs in a few ways - most notably, it is only a specification for server-to-server communication. Each server can, within the restrictions placed on it by its need to communicate with other servers, implement whatever server-to-client communication scheme it chooses. This means that protocols within individual IM services might be different - but nobody's getting locked out, since anyone with a domain can start their own IM service - just as anyone with a domain can send e-mail from that domain.
Note: this means that if you're not on AOL (or using an AOL client), your IM address will be someone@somewhere.xxx. To you, AOL users will be someone@aol.com, unless your IM server sends unknown users to AOL (and then you have the issue of collisions between local usernames and AOL names - but people/servers with small userbases probably wouldn't care much).
This solution appears to open (some) IM (not all features are supported via OpenIM in the draft, and there's no guarantee that AOL will support more advanced features in their OpenIM gateways). However, it also preserves AOL's lock on it's username-space and adds inconvenience for non-AOL-IM users, encouraging them to use AOL's client.
Still, it basically puts IM on the same footing and a similar architecture to email, which is a Good Thing.
Randell
p.s. Note: in a previous life, I was one of 4 or 5 people at a company called PlayNet that wrote what later became AOL, including the original IM design. (This was in '84/85.)
I've been doing bots and such with the Lotus SameTime product, which is an off-shoot of the AOL IM product. It's usefull to have an entity available that is hooked into your Enterprise Directory so a person look-up is only an IM away. The API is horrid! It uses lots of class variables so that you can only have one connection to the server per JVM! Ugly. The Win32 API is not an option for me ;-). Hopefully AOL will provide an API a bit more...uh...modular than SameTime's
I did see a page which had some of the AIM protocol reverse engineered, but I figured since the MS/AOL pissing match the page would be out of date.
Blar.
What would be nice, is if in additioning to opening up the client/server protocol, they'd implement and open a server-to-server protocol. This would instantly create an open, universal instant messaging network. If they want to guarantee their position as the instant messaging leader forever, this is the way to go. If they don't, it's only a matter of time before Microsoft figures out a way to eclipse them (as is evident in the fact that Exchange 2000 will include an IM server as part of the install).
Now is the time to do this right.
--
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
As many probably know, M$ has been a noisemaker in trying to get AOL to open the IM protocols so that it can try to take over the IM world with it's Messenger service. if you want more info on the petition that's been going around about this, go to http://www.freeim.org
I was under the impression that AOL had opened the protocol up earlier to let clones like GAIM enact with the protocol. Wasn't this what prompted the whole Microsoft-AOL battle, where AOL kept trying to lock MS out? However, I think this is the way it should be-this will enable people to use clones of AIM without fear of compatibility issues.
Colin Winters
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
I don't think the AIM protocol was a secret, considering how many clones there are out there. There may have been a few items in the protocol that people didn't know about, but nothing majorly functional AFAIK.
Still, it's a good thing that they did this, since even though it's possible to reverse engineer these protocols, doesn't mean it's fun, quick, or easy.
-- Truth goes out the door when rumor comes innuendo. -- Groucho Marx
Heya. There's also been plenty of work out there in backwards engineering the oscar client -- we won't go into that here, though. heh. Anyways, You're correct on the TOC server being a "scaled down" version of OSCAR. Currently TOC does not support: Talk, Direct Connections (Images/etc), sending files, and buddy icons. In the TOC Protocol spec there are places set up for rvous_propose which would allow you to send propose requests. With this implemented sending/receiving files, talks, etc should be trivial. We'd just need to be told what protocol to use once the clientClient talks have been initiated. If not, I'm sure we could hack them up ourselves. The only other thing lying around other than that would be buddy icons. Either way, this can be a Good Thing(tm). Cheers and Happy /.'ing
---
---
Rob Flynn
Pidgin
Here's a more detailed article on C|Net basically AOL has said they will soon present a proposal for interoperability with AIM. This seems like instead of making the protocol open, they'll release some sort of AIM API. The FTC investigation of the AOL-Time Warner merger is also sited as the cause for this move my C|Net. It's about time AOL did this, heck even Jesse Berst ranted about this yesterday.
IM should either be a server-side service like SMTP, provided by your ISP, a peer to peer system like Gnutella, or an open distributed system like IRC. In fact, with minimal additions, IRC could be the basis for a global, distributed IM system.
I'm still waiting for an IM client that doesn't SUCK. Resources that is. Every one I've used is an atrocious resource hog...especially ICQ with all it's bells and whistles and garish eye-gauging UI.
How about a good ole command line client? Messages (or notices of messages) could just pop up on the command line. Enter a command or two to look through the list of messages. Enter another command to set up a "talk"-like chat.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
Stop it right there. This is your IT department. We are coming to apprehend you. We also don't like the idea of your putting your butt on your web site.
They are alive! I've just pulled down the 1.0 server and got it going. Its pretty slick. The handling of the various protocols are handled by the server, so the client doesn't even have to worry about if its talking to jabber/icq/aim
plus, the protocol agents run independently of the main jabber server, so you can update one at a time, plus completely GPL'd.
Run. I like water. Push My rutabaga.
Although considered a rival of us by some people, EveryBuddy has been doing this for a while. http://www.everybudy.com Give them a look :) Cheers
---
---
Rob Flynn
Pidgin
Check out Everybuddy
It currently uses the TOC protocol, which is the Used-to-be-open protocol that gaim and tik and every other aim clone uses. It doesn't have all the features that OSCAR has, like file transfer and all that. If the OSCAR protocol is opened up then all the clones will increase in quality across the board. If they are just "re-opening" TOC, then nothing will change really.
But if people are looking for something that uses multiple services in one client, check out Everybuddy.
Ben Rigas
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
All double-talk about open standards and consumer interest aside, the feds *want* to see AIM become *the* messaging standard for chat traffic for one simple reason - it's centralized. All message traffic transits AOL servers for easy monitoring and collection by the boys in blue (or men in black, for that matter).
These pressures from the FTC are meant to drive wider adoption of AIM (the standard), whether or not the "AOL" is necessarily part of it.
Just my take on the situation, of course
-Isaac
I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. For Entertainment Purposes Only.
I'm on Gaim right now. There have been a few bugs, but 0.9.19 seems rather stable to me.
The announcement is not clear on what everyone here is assuming. Does opening up a protocol also mean AOL is letting everyone use their IM servers?
I mean just cause you know the FTP protocol doesn't mean you can use my FTP server!
I have, and I'd like to point out three other posters interpreted what the original poster said the same way I did.
Second, given the syntactical structure of English, the subclause following the comma refers to the AOL policy. "[T]o reflexively block anyone who implements the protocol and tries to talk to their servers without their permission" is a prepositional phrase describing the policy, so the sentence is equivalent to saying "What likely happened here is that AOL has/had a policy which is arguably llegal."
But I do apologize if I misunderstood the author's intent. I did not intend to accidentally flame someone because of his grammar, given my tendency to make similar errors.
Steven E. Ehrbar
There is a program called everybuddy that allows you to use AIM/ICQ/Yahoo Chat all in one program. I haven't checked it out lately, but it was pretty cool when I did.
They're constantly working on adding more chat types into it. It does requires accounts for each of the services, but that's not too hard to handle.
I forget the site, but try searching on freshmeat for it.
yup yup :) I believe we've got all the big one's patched up. Cheers.
---
---
Rob Flynn
Pidgin
What a bunch of crap. That's like saying Ford has a monopoly in the Ford Mustang market because they don't let other people license the design for their cars.
There are no end of entrients in the IM market... MS, Yahoo, Tribal Voice all come to mind without thinking about it very hard.
Besides, Mr. Anti trust lawyer, there is nothing magical that says a) if you have over 50% market share you are a monopoly and b) there is nothing illegal about being a monopoly per se.
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
Third, they will slaughter all the other messaging services except for ICQ, and even ICQ is going to hurt a little. Having the biggest installed base counts for more than having the broadest featureset.
Didn't AOL purchase ICQ?
The very popular mIRC has a lot of scripting abilities in it. Older versions had "default scripts," and, if you had DCC autoget enabled, someone could replace your default scripts rather easily, and you would start sending out the virus yourself. I've also seen a newer version of that which relies on .bat files of some kind.
Also, the much older ircii had numerous "warscripts," "botscripts," and so forth that, at the very least, were often useful-but-trojaned, allowing remote users to control IRC clients. Worse yet, ircii even had an "/exec" command, allowing you to execute commands right onto your shell. As you might imagine, getting newbies to "/exec rm [fileglob of your choice]" was considered high sport.
Basically, they had roughly the same susceptibility to attacks as does the oft-maligned-and-deserving-it Microsoft Outlook.
I don't see why Microsoft OS inc. couldn't, however, license the 'amazing' new 'IntelliActiveDirectMessageX' application from 'Microsoft Apps, inc.', and then include it anyway.
Quite simply, I think it'll take proliferation of an open standard/protocol to fix any monopolization of this 'market', just as with so many others.
Joe Sixpack is dead!
Hacker Public Radio is our Friend
Althought I do not know if AOL would implement the PGP/Encrypted/Key style of messaging, it could be accomplished with a fairly simple GAIM plugin. Although, it'd only work from GAIMGAIM. I've been talking with the TiK authors on various occasions about making our two clients interoperate a little better. We support some of their customized features and in return they support some of ours. It could work out to be a pretty good thing :-) Cheers and Happy Slashdotting
---
---
Rob Flynn
Pidgin
The official AOL documentation for TOC is included in the GAIM distrobution. I doubt that they are just re-releasing that, but I suppose it is possible.
Several days ago, the TOC server went down for some time. I re-compiled GAIM to use the "experimental" OSCAR support, and I've been online ever since.
Ah, the joys of open source software. My GAIM conversation windows have a big toggle button on the bottom marked "Sveedish Cheff". Turn it on, and everything I say gets converted before being sent. Bork Bork Bork!
------
You mean, more clueless newbies than they already have? Where would they _find_ them? Cloning? Putting AOL devices in zoos for the chimps to play with? The mind boggles....
-reemul
You're just jealous 'cuz the voices talk to *me*
ICQ assigns people by number, not name. (trying to do names in something like the Internet is stupid anyway, I don't want to be known as Bob1027)
So its quite easy to have multiple people on your list with the exact same name, in fact I have two of them right now. Its not really a problem because when they message you, its usually pretty easy to tell which one is which by their email addy and what they're actually saying.
It might get more difficult if you have like six of them that way, but you can rename people in ICQ on your list to whatever you want, so its a non issue. Besides, its easier to keep track of that then of Bob_1, Bob102, Bob5, 2343Bob, and the other assorted myriad of idiotic names the AOL system conjures up.
-- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
Anyone know what the deal is on Jabber? I know the project is alive, and they now have reached version 1.0 for their server (which incidentally is an open server-to-server protocol like another post here wished for). I just don't ever hear anything about jabber anymore unless I go to their website.
Anyway, if AOL is opening their Oscar protocol (as opposed to the TOC protocol) this could be a great help to Jabber, if they incorporate it. Let's make this thing more widespread people! If you work at an ISP, set up a jabber server and provide your customers with clients and instructions for setting it up. Same thing if you manage a University computing center or, possibly, a business. This is our chance to make a decentralized worldwide free instant messing network. And the software is _already here_.
--
grappler
Vidi, Vici, Veni
I like the way Everybuddy does it - each user on your contact list can have an arbitrary number of user IDs for any of the supported IM systems associated with it. If the user comes online on any of the accounts it shows the user as online. I think there's a way to set a preferred protocol to use if the user is online using more than one system.
Also see the poster who mentioned Jabber.
--
CPAN rules. - Guido van Rossum
I read about this over at news.com and some things NEED to be cleared up.
1: The FTC does not care about AOL opening up the protocol because it is a free service.
2: Furthermore the article states "We are planning to put out to the industry a way we think that can be done in terms of commitment to interoperability. (The industry) will hear something from us soon,"
The SOON means whenever AOL get's around it. They will probably say WE are the standard in their proposal. And it will get drafted to death by Microsoft and others which will delay the process. There is and won't be a universal chat client for a long time.
The decision to open the protocol is surprising as just this week a rival program entitled Odigo debuted its latest version with connectivity to AOL and ICQ, making it universal. In a not-so-surprising move, AOL blocked that access like it had in the past to Odigo, Microsoft, and Yahoo chat programs.
What likely happened here is that AOL has/had a policy to reflexively block anyone who implements the protocol and tries to talk to their servers without their permission, which is arguably illegal and definitely inappropriate, or at least impolite.
However, opening it up actually does show some benefit; First of all, this gives still more benefit to AOL users, allowing them to trade messages with people who won't use AIM (because it sucks.) Second, they can stop fighting legal battles over it. Third, they will slaughter all the other messaging services except for ICQ, and even ICQ is going to hurt a little. Having the biggest installed base counts for more than having the broadest featureset.
In any case, this will put an end to anyone who has implemented their own messaging service. It's over, folks. Change your messager to support AIM and put an ad in it, and move on to the next software development project. You missed the boat.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I think it would be nicest if the whole system was simplified.
At the moment the main model (commercial/propriety or not) is that the one system does everything. It registers people's online state, stores undelivered messages, stores people's personal details, performs searches, etc etc.
Some systems use client-to-client protocols to lower the load on the server and that's great, but IMHO it'd be even better if the services were completely separate. All that the main system would ever need to do is register whether people were online or not, and dictate who was allowed to know about who else was on.
Having different servers implementing standardised protocols for every service and letting the clients decide which ones they're going to use would make the whole thing much easier to extend. (Even if the services were all provided by the same provider.)
Splitting them up and modulising would also give providers and users the freedom to choose what services they wanted, and it'd generally make it easier for each module to be developed separately. If the original system didn't support server-server communication, someone could quite easily write a new one that did.
Everyone who works at AOL (myself included) as well as other stockholders want this merger to go through.
The idea doesn?t bother you? Don't get me wrong, I like AOL as much as everyone else (*cough*), but doesn?t the idea of one company having so much power disturb you? AOL has constantly been disruptive force online. And their policies about things like free speech are not anywhere near the policies laid out in the US constitution.
When I had an AOL account, back in the day, the provided free web space. And they still do, it's just, you need to have a huge add plastered up on your site. I find that disgusting. Profiting of other peoples work (when they are already paying for the service). AOL is commoditizing its user base in more ways than I can imagine (this is a company that used to sell mailing lists of its users). I don't think AOL owing one of the largest 'old media' companies in the US (and the world) doesn't exactly warm my heart.
It used to be the dream that the Internet would break down the barriers of nation and the world. And in some ways, it has. The other day I got an ICQ message from someone in Iran. But in that world it isn't the individual that's being empowered, it?s the corporation.
I hope the FTC cuts this merger like a dead rat.
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
"and dear god does this website suck now." -- CmdrTaco
Well the Oscar protocol opens and closes every now and then, but not in the traditional sense. If you search enough, you can find [outdated] Oscar protocol specifications. In fact, my roommate was working on a C++ Builder library for Win32 to implement what he found of it. Granted he doesn't get the Voice over IP feature (or whatever it is) but he'll get most of the protocol.
The TOC protocol has always been open since they released the specifications for the Java TIC and Tcl/Tk TiK clients some time ago.
Then you have Jabber, which offers free open source clients and servers that bridge between their own open source XML protocol, AOL's [TOC probably] and AOL's/Mirabilis ICQ. Unfortunately this doesn't seem to be incredibly popular.
Why not marshall all the protocols together on the client end? MSN, Yahoo!, AIM... whatever.
I've been working on an open source prototype using this idea for a bit now. Its Win32 and written in VB6, but the final product is planned to be compiled in Delphi 5.0: elysium.systemcrash.org.
"After three days without programming, life becomes meaningless." - Tao of Programming
Gnutella did NOT have a worm. They had someone hosting a vb script. That's like saying that ftp has a worm because some goober hosts a vb script on his ftp server.
I do not believe that ANY chat client has the ability to execute code or even a scripting language, and if someone sends someone else a file that has a virus, that isn't a worm it's two stupid users.
Finkployd
Everybuddy is at www.everybuddy.com. I use it (it does AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, and MSN, but I only use the first two) and it works pretty well. It still is a bit lacking in the feature department -- you can't set default means of contact without editing the config file by hand, you can't view info or away messages, you can't do any cool ICQ extended features, etc. -- but it's coming along. I like it because it's lightweight, ad-free, and doesn't require me to run two programs. I even have two AIM screen names in there, just in case people are still used to messaging me through my old name.
It's worth the download, IMO. Hopefully it'll only get better over time.
For more information, click here.
I've seen Jabber mentioned a few times already but I think it deserves to be be recognized. A GPLed instant messaging client/server is a good thing. I think they have a good design using XML and an email like postoffice system. I plan on starting up my own public jabber server as soon as I get a dedicated Internet connection.
People need to start using Jabber. The have a few clients up already and are working on more, it seems this projects only problem is a shortage of users and testers.
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
And I quote them all. . .
Here is the article on eFront. And here is the Register article about FTC's request.
And here are some additional background links from c|net: 1 and 2. Each of those is extensively linked to additional information about AOL's previous runins with Tribal Voice and MS.
Work for Change & GET PAID!
from my understanding of it, AIM has two protocols. Oscar, and TOC.
TOC is what AOL had all the docs for, and what thier TiK client used. It's also what gaim uses to communicate with.TOC basicly being a "front-end" so to speak for the real protocol
Oscar is their closed protocol they use for their own official clients. Probably better then TOC, I'm not sure on the specifics, hopefully others will post. This has NEVER been open, and subject to change. I'm sure all gaim users remember a couple weeks ago, when they changed to login sequence and we couldn't get in for a few days until the gaim guys figured out how they changed it.
If it's just TOC they are re-releasing, then it's not much more then all the info that's already out there. If it's Oscar, then it should let all clents such as gaim, and even the un-offical icq clients, like licq and gnomeicq, to intergrate AIM support.
But I have a feeling it's TOC, and not Oscar they are going to open up. Hopefully others will post and set all the technical details straight.
But how do you differentiate between all the users on the current systems? What if there are 2 different people, one on AIM, one on ICQ, both using the same nickname? Split it up into seperate sections as to which client they are using?
AIM List
Randomguy
lalala
mr.nobody
ICQ List
Randomguy
YetAnotherInstantMessenger
lalala
pete
Might be a little weird if a bunch more IM programs begin showing up/getting popular.. hmm.
BilldaCat
As much inconvenience as it's caused and most posts here to the contrary, I completely understand AOL's past position on this, at least from a business standpoint.
Microsoft's IM client will become an integrated part of all future releases of their OSes, and they'll annex the man-share of new subscribers. After that, the only ones signing up for AIM will be AOL subscribers who become AIM users by default.
AOL users (of which I doubt there are many on /.) can expect this experience:
This type of experience is just going to get worse and worse. [SARCASM]But take comfort. At least more and more of your Windows desktop will be displaying ads you can't get rid of.[/SARCASM]
Windows runs command stored in these registry keys:
r entVersion/Run
e ntVersion/Run
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE/software/Microsoft/Windows/Cur
HKEY_CURRENT_USER/software/Microsoft/Windows/Curr
As well as like runOnce and every thing like that in the same directorys.
Btw, a good way to find something in the registry is to do a search for something like the program file name.
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
"and dear god does this website suck now." -- CmdrTaco
Uhm, yes, ICQ is owned by AOL. At least, Mirabilis, who makes ICQ, was bought by AOL about a year ago. It made slashdot.
Back when I was in college (Around '88) we had bitnet and bitnet relay chat. Built into VM/CMS was the ability to send an instant message to any other user on the network, find out if that user was logged in and chat real time with one or many users. The messages were easy to field using your own REXX code and you could pretty much do anything with them. In fact, I wrote a client-server remote control app that would allow you to send messages to a server on a remote system and execute commands on that system, forwarding the output of the commands back to you. Hmm. I should have patented that...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
So let me get this right.. I have an essentially private network (AOL), build a tool that I never claim is open (AIM), and then I get government pressure to let other people use it? Why? AOL's competitors don't have any "right" to interoperate with AIM, they didn't spend any money developing it, didn't build up the infrastructure, didn't send out a bajillion CDs to get people to use it, but now they want to leverage it. Why does crap like this happen? What ever happened to private property rights in this country?
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!