Slashdot Mirror


Google Wave Now Open To All

tonyfugere writes "After a year of testing by invitation only, Google Wave has been opened to the public. From what I have seen, it looks like it could be beneficial for documenting brainstorming sessions beyond simple instant messaging protocols." (Google Wave is "also great for entertaining the masses," says tonyfugere, who links to the slightly NSFW demonstration below.)

180 comments

  1. The link you actually care about by BitZtream · · Score: 5, Informative
    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    1. Re:The link you actually care about by BitZtream · · Score: 4, Informative

      Should also note, its actually open to Apps for your Domain as well.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    2. Re:The link you actually care about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No kidding!

      To summarize, we now have Google (Chromium), Firefox, Opera and Adobe (Flash + all dev tools) all supporting a fully open source (BSD licensed) and unemcumbered high quality VP8 file format, and only Microsoft and Apple supporting h264 which while also high quality, is heavily patent encumbered and proprietary. Google wave is pretty neat, but the WebM project is the real news of the morning.

    3. Re:The link you actually care about by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Because no one submitted a story about what you want to be posted.

      You should learn how slashdot works rather than posting random stuff in another thread that its completely unrelated too.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    4. Re:The link you actually care about by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Looks like premier edition only though.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    5. Re:The link you actually care about by MrHanky · · Score: 1

      Wrong. At least three people had submitted stories about it before this was posted to the front page.

    6. Re:The link you actually care about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It wasn't random. Nor "completely unrelated".

      As for how Slashdot works, it's simple.
      Google, Apple = good
      Microsoft, DRM, patents = bad

    7. Re:The link you actually care about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, yea cause Google and Apple are soooo goood.......

    8. Re:The link you actually care about by lagfest · · Score: 1

      Wrong.

      It has to be enabled by an administrator, though.

    9. Re:The link you actually care about by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Okay, so the wave story was submitted first or timothy read the wave story first or only god knows, don't get your panties all app in a knot there buddy, you'll be okay. Sometimes things don't always go in the order you want.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    10. Re:The link you actually care about by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      It seems to be part of premier to me. I can not enable it on my non-premier account.

      If you follow the link at wave.google.com about it for AFYD then it clearly states its for premier apps accounts.

      From wave.google.com:

      New! Google Apps domains can turn on Google Wave.
      Anyone can now use Google Wave. No invitation needed!

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    11. Re:The link you actually care about by MrHanky · · Score: 0, Troll

      You're the one getting your panties in a knot, moron. I just posted a link to a related item that I thought would interest Slashdotters more, with all the concerns regarding html5 video lately.

    12. Re:The link you actually care about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have already enabled it for our standard account.

      Simply go to the dashboard and "add more services".

    13. Re:The link you actually care about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a cheapskate (I haven't even signed up for a free /. account I'm so cheap!), and unless Google goofed when I signed up for the free version of AFYD, then Wave is available in the free version. Perhaps it hasn't hit your server yet? Or, in case you just don't know how to enable it, go to "manage this domain" then "add more services" then "add it now" on Google Wave.

  2. People are using it? by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wow, I have not heard about Wave in a while...I thought it had been lost in the bin of Forgotten Google Projects (FGPs).

    --
    Palm trees and 8
    1. Re:People are using it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm so glad that /. came it it's senses about google wave because when it was announced everyone was so excited about it, I thought I had gone crazy to feel otherwise. Now everyone is giggling about it, asking what the point is and why exactly it's a "revolution".

      Jeez just watch that video, I mean it's embarrassing.

    2. Re:People are using it? by dsavi · · Score: 3, Funny

      Maybe this will lead to someone actually knowing what Google Wave is. I never thought I'd see the day.

    3. Re:People are using it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because Google failed to actually do anything useful with it. It's still a cool project, Google just doesn't care and had never released the source so it was hard for anyone else to use it for anything interesting.

    4. Re:People are using it? by Zelgadiss · · Score: 1

      I must say, it has improved usability wise quite a bit since I tried it a few months ago.

      At least now it's clearer how to go about doing things.

    5. Re:People are using it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      When the invites passed through all my friends and I we had a frenzied afternoon of waving, the majority of which involved erasing what the previous person had written and changing it to something witty and insightful like "I LIKE WILLIES".

      Then the wave started to gobble several hundred megs of RAM to even open, and well. That was the end of that.

  3. My best fit for Wave; by B5_geek · · Score: 5, Interesting

    IMHO, the best niche that Wave can fill is by replacing message boards. By merging the IRC/Email/newsgroup/BBS concept it makes it perfect for following threads of conversations, starting new discussions, replying privately to one or two individuals, embedding images and/or videos.

    I would gladly donate my left kidney if all my favorite forums/groups switched over to Wave.

    --
    "The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
    1. Re:My best fit for Wave; by natehoy · · Score: 5, Funny

      A few of mine tried. After a couple hundred messages, you have to type each character and wait a second or two before you can type the next one.

      I finally gave up when it started taking me more than a minute to type a short sentence. I started longing for the incredible speed of BBSes and my old 300-baud modem.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    2. Re:My best fit for Wave; by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Let's see the kidney first.

    3. Re:My best fit for Wave; by natehoy · · Score: 1

      PS: If you want a good message-board system, try BeeHive ( http://beehiveforum.sourceforge.net/ )

      No, it's not the same as Google Wave, but the threaded conversations are quite good.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    4. Re:My best fit for Wave; by demonlapin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why is this modded funny? It's painfully true. Some friends and I have used Wave for a LOST discussion group every week, and it's pretty bad by the end of each episode.

    5. Re:My best fit for Wave; by tignet · · Score: 0, Redundant

      I realize you've been modded funny, but it's no joke. It can seriously crawl. I was using Chrome to test it, figuring that Chrome would work best. Huge mistake!

      My suggestion is to avoid using Chrome with Google Wave at all costs. There is an open Chrome bug about how slow Google Wave's JavaScript runs on it--cue irony. I've found it quite usable on FireFox, though. Truthfully, I've never been in a wave with more then two or three active participants, so your mileage may vary.

    6. Re:My best fit for Wave; by D+Ninja · · Score: 5, Funny

      Some friends and I have used Wave for a LOST discussion group every week, and it's pretty bad by the end of each episode

      The Wave or the show?

    7. Re:My best fit for Wave; by Brandee07 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My best use for Wave: FAQs.

      It's honestly my only use for wave, but it's a good one. Someone asks a question, someone else answers, someone else corrects the answer, someone else provides links to citations.

      An example, the wave I manage: https://wave.google.com/wave/waveref/googlewave.com/w+N0MhqpVgB

      Active discussions require a very active moderator to keep the wave from getting so large as to die the slow death of lag. Most collaborative documents are better handled in Google Docs. Random "which do you like best" polls should be purged from the internet in general.

    8. Re:My best fit for Wave; by radtea · · Score: 4, Informative

      After a couple hundred messages, you have to type each character and wait a second or two before you can type the next one.

      I've found Wave basically unusable on my netbook with Firefox for much the same reason, even with small waves. The fastest it runs is unacceptabley slow, and this on a machine that is powerful enough to run OpenOffice acceptably fast.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    9. Re:My best fit for Wave; by natehoy · · Score: 1

      I joined a few "public" waves to test it out, and in anything resembling a public forum it's useless, and the browser is irrelevant - they are all slow once you reach a certain threshold.

      It appears that each keypress is sent to Wave so it can show up immediately for other people, and the browser waits for that keypress to be acknowledged before processing the next one. I think they are running a sort of session-based keylogger so the keys can be sent directly up rather than submitted via HTTP-POST.

      But it scales very, very poorly. I've abandoned half-sentences on Wave because it's become too slow to type (I've seen upwards of 20-30 seconds per character, and deleting a character takes just as long).

      But, yeah, for small Waves with a dozen participants and fewer than a couple hundred posts, it runs just fine. And it's a pretty neat tool.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    10. Re:My best fit for Wave; by natehoy · · Score: 1

      Damn! You beat me to it. :)

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    11. Re:My best fit for Wave; by LoudMusic · · Score: 1

      Seems like a lot of obscure collaboration tasks could take huge advantage of Wave. Like Mike's D&D email sessions.

      http://www.penny-arcade.com/2010/5/19/

      In Wave you could have lots of people acting their roles and adding to the story while a plug-in handles random number generation for combat and such. It could use a Google Maps plug-in to run the map and position characters.

      --
      No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
    12. Re:My best fit for Wave; by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so you have to type your replies into a text editor and use copy/paste into Wave to make it useful? That really sucks.

    13. Re:My best fit for Wave; by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      We're using it at work for collaboration. it's freaking sweet. It's not perfect but for free it *more* than meets our needs. I hardly hear anyone talking about wave. It's a shame imo, because it is pretty damn useful at least in certain circumstances.

    14. Re:My best fit for Wave; by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      What are you on a P2 450 mhz system with IE6? My work system is at least 3 years old with some cheap intel graphics card and even 3 years ago it wasn't top of the line (typical business machine, imo, just enough to get the job done) and wave is as smooth as any other text box even with the constant ajax requests to show what I am typing as I type it.

    15. Re:My best fit for Wave; by natehoy · · Score: 1

      For small groups, it works fine. And maybe they've fixed the performance problems for larger public groups in the month since I last checked.

      But, no, this was on a relatively modern machine with a decent connection to the Internet, running the latest Firefox. I thought it would be better with Chrome, but it wasn't. I thought it would be better with Firefox + GoogleGears, but it wasn't. Tried this on my corporate machine (Windows XP) and my home machine (recent Linux Mint) and it was still slow.

      A lot of the problem appeared to be attaching GoogleBots or whatever they call those annoying-as-hell little automated posting shitboxes they had going for a while. You'd post something, one of the bots would reply to it, another 5 would reply to the first one, and the entire thread would become painfully slow.

      But I had painful response times on larger threads long before the GoogleBots came on the scene.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    16. Re:My best fit for Wave; by cbreaker · · Score: 3, Informative

      Chrome has pretty fast JavaScript, but it's not very stable. There's a game called Lord of Ultima, which uses Javascript to display everything. It's pretty amazing, actually. When you run it in Chrome, it's nice and speedy. For about an hour. Then it starts to hang, pause, choke, and it's not even worth using.

      Firefox isn't quite as smooth as Chrome in the game, but it stays at that speed for days of leaving the game open.

      Just another reason I see no reason to use anything other than Firefox. It just works.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    17. Re:My best fit for Wave; by Avumede · · Score: 1

      You may want to try it again. They have been working on performance for quite a while now, and recently made some substantial improvements.

    18. Re:My best fit for Wave; by icebraining · · Score: 1

      Frame-based layout, for easy navigation.

      No, no, no.

      "Hey, check out this topic, here's the URL... Oops, that's the main page".

    19. Re:My best fit for Wave; by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Used to be the former; now, sadly, it's mostly the latter.

    20. Re:My best fit for Wave; by Spazntwich · · Score: 1

      Have you tried it with Chrome?

      I have yet to mess with either Chrome or Wave, so I don't even know if it's as heavily javascript based as I assume, but this seems like something Chrome's supposedly faster javascript engine would excel at... if my lazy assumptions are true.

    21. Re:My best fit for Wave; by mjwx · · Score: 1

      I've found Wave basically unusable on my netbook with Firefox for much the same reason, even with small waves. The fastest it runs is unacceptabley slow, and this on a machine that is powerful enough to run OpenOffice acceptably fast.

      It's a beta.

      I know Google produces exceptionally high quality betas, the quality of software that the likes of Microsoft and Apple would be proud to call a RTM version but please, it's still a beta. Submit a bug report if possible and help.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    22. Re:My best fit for Wave; by carp3_noct3m · · Score: 1

      Does it make me a brown noser if I say I actually like slash?

      --
      "It's ok, I'm completely secure as long as my iron is off"
    23. Re:My best fit for Wave; by natehoy · · Score: 1

      Beehive supports direct linking to both a topic and an individual post. It handles building the frame around the post quite nicely.

      Yes, I know frames are the work of Satan, but they are done very well in BeeHive.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    24. Re:My best fit for Wave; by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      My best use for Wave: FAQs.

      It's honestly my only use for wave, but it's a good one. Someone asks a question, someone else answers, someone else corrects the answer, someone else provides links to citations.

      An example, the wave I manage: https://wave.google.com/wave/waveref/googlewave.com/w+N0MhqpVgB

      A wiki page does the same thing, loads faster, has less overhead, as doesn't take up 2/3 of the screen with drek irrelevant to the FAQ - and can be seen by anyone without needing to log in. If that's the "best use" for Wave, that's damming it with faint praise indeed.

    25. Re:My best fit for Wave; by ukyoCE · · Score: 1

      Yep, not sure how much faster this one will be able to get.

      You could make the point that you should be splitting off into multiple threads (waves) for each "message board post", but I don't think they have any way to do that right now. So your original wave keeps going off on tangents and totally unrelated posts, and javascript gets slower and slower...

      Might be as easy to fix as making a "Break off to new Wave" option for removing tangential responses. Or improving the folding so that collapsed sections don't slow down the rest of the wave (ie: dont get pulled into memory unless you expand them).

  4. Privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    I just opted out as soon as possible, given Google's stance on privacy issues.

    1. Re:Privacy by xZgf6xHx2uhoAj9D · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't understand. If you don't already have a Google account, then you wouldn't have to opt out. If you do already have a Google account, then you patently don't actually have a problem with their privacy policy, right?

    2. Re:Privacy by nacturation · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I just opted out as soon as possible, given Google's stance on privacy issues.

      I opted in as soon as possible, given Google's stance on privacy issues.

      (My comment is as meaningless as yours if you're not going to elaborate at least a little.)

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    3. Re:Privacy by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      ...Because there are really a lot of other providers offering this?

      Being privacy conscious is a good thing, however there comes a time where you have to see the risk to benefit ratio at the moment leans heavily towards using Google's services.

      If you want to be completely anonymous, don't use any services by any web provider and encrypt all traffic and use Tor and all that fun stuff, but you won't really experience the web and it won't make you productive.

      If there are other super-private services that do all the things Google does, switch to them. Considering that there aren't, Google is your best bet.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    4. Re:Privacy by natehoy · · Score: 1

      I'm confused - Google Wave is something you have to specifically sign up for, not opt in to. And up until today you've had to ask someone for an invitation to join.

      Or are you confusing it with Google Buzz?

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    5. Re:Privacy by oldspewey · · Score: 1

      I'd tell you to be careful opting out of Google, but you're probably in a place where you can't read this reply anyhow.

      --
      If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
    6. Re:Privacy by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      The funny thing is, I use gmail for my email, but I download it from their POP server.

      And I almost never, ever, log into Google using my browser, and generally log out as soon after as possible.

      So they might be reading my email, but when you use POP it doesn't add any advertising to email message you download. And they can't spam my browser view with anything connected to my email.

    7. Re:Privacy by BitZtream · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You can turn off the advertising on the web interface as well, just go into your settings and turn it off.

      Its optional, and on by default, its also so unintrusive that I actually turned it back on just because occasionally I'll see something I actually care to learn about and I'd rather they get some occasional cash for letting me use their services for free.

      You do realize that if you never give them any incentive to give you the free service they will eventually stop giving it to you ... right?

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    8. Re:Privacy by WeatherGod · · Score: 1

      Are you confusing Buzz and Wave? They are two different things.

    9. Re:Privacy by smoothnorman · · Score: 1

      Yes they are. As a public service, please list the differences here?

    10. Re:Privacy by somersault · · Score: 0, Troll

      It makes you wonder, what kind of embarrassing porn are these guys into that their privacy is such a big deal..? "gaymidgetsinleatherbikiniseatingoverripebananas.com"? Honestly, I understand security concerns, but I don't get the whole online "privacy" issue unless you're actually doing something illegal.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    11. Re:Privacy by flintmecha · · Score: 0

      they might be reading my email

      You're not as important as you think you are.

    12. Re:Privacy by Bakkster · · Score: 1

      But that avoids the question asked about the privacy policy. In your case, your issue is with advertising, yet you admit to having no issue with them reading your private e-mail.

      --
      Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
    13. Re:Privacy by natehoy · · Score: 1

      Well, for one, Buzz was the one they shoved down your throat and you had to opt out of, and was a bit of a privacy debacle.

      Wave was the one that you not only had to go looking for, but you had to request an invite which took weeks to arrive (or you had to know someone who had a free invite they could give you).

      So "opting out" of Wave is technically not possible. You have to go looking for it.

      Buzz was largely considered "Wave Lite" by many of us who used Wave before Buzz came out. It's a bit more social network and a bit less collaboration, though there is significant overlap in the functions of the two.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    14. Re:Privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh and what's that then? The same policies that every single other entity has to comply with regardless of their opinion on it?
      Yeah, grow up please and stop being childish over his comments. He was just reiterating what the truth is.

      I bet you're using Bing just to be a total rebel, right? Because Microsoft are totally trustworthy, am i right?
      Funny how they happily handed search results over without hesitation where Google fought against it.
      And before someone jumps in and mentions how "google have personal information", i can bet my left testicle that you have googled yourself before. If not, you aren't normal.
      You go you rebel you, stick it to Eric!

      You already don't have privacy just by being on this website, despite you not posting with an account.
      You already don't have privacy just by being part of society, actually.
      From the very day you were born, you lost your privacy.

    15. Re:Privacy by maxume · · Score: 1

      "they" aren't reading it, a program/system is analyzing the content.

      I mean, Google has a policy that humans don't casually access the content, do you trust Google+that policy more or less than some mom-and-pop ISP?

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    16. Re:Privacy by Bakkster · · Score: 1

      "they" aren't reading it, a program/system is analyzing the content.

      I know that, I'm just refering to what the GP said.

      --
      Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
    17. Re:Privacy by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      Start your own wave server. That is the thing, it is not a Google only thing.

    18. Re:Privacy by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      How did you expect to pay for a free service? I really dislike it when people don't want to pay and done want adverts either. It's one or the other otherwise they can't support themselves as money does not grow on trees.

    19. Re:Privacy by squallbsr · · Score: 1

      Compared to FaceBook, Google looks like a saint.

      --
      Sleep: A completely inadequate substitution for Caffeine.
    20. Re:Privacy by somersault · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How is it a fallacy? I really don't give a crap who knows what I'm doing online, because 1) I don't do anything illegal, and 2) I don't have any moral issues with porn.

      And Mark Zuckerberg is an asshole who certainly hasn't done anything to help the "dumb fucks" he refers to. He makes a living off of them in fact. He can collect all the info he wants on me, but it's pretty pointless as I either block or ignore ads on principal.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    21. Re:Privacy by WNight · · Score: 1

      You're not as important as you think you are.

      Neither are you, but they read all unencrypted email. Data-mining is just that cheap.

    22. Re:Privacy by WNight · · Score: 1

      I really dislike how someone starts an ostensibly free service and then funds it with guilt, making their business choices your problem.

      I don't know Google's thoughts but I doubt they're losing anything - just not making as much from this guy. I'd imagine simply keeping you from using an MS or Apple product has value, as does increasing their brand by more people using their domain for email. And then there's the advertising factor - if you did have to buy a pay service after ten years, who're you going to do it with, the people who've never nagged you or some random company you heard about via spam?

    23. Re:Privacy by icebraining · · Score: 1

      I don't do anything illegal nor do I have any moral issues with porn, but I still value my privacy.

      Without privacy, there can be no anonymity. Without anonymity, there can be no freedom.

      Now, I realize we're only talking about web history, bu the rule shouldn't be "Why shouldn't I be watched if I do nothing wrong", it should be "If I do nothing wrong, why should I be watched?".

    24. Re:Privacy by icebraining · · Score: 1

      Wave is also a Federated Protocol, so anyone can host their own server* that talk to each other when needed, but keep "in-server" waves private.

      * when there are other implementations available or Google releases its own as OSS.

    25. Re:Privacy by Omestes · · Score: 1

      ...but they read all unencrypted email. Data-mining is just that cheap.

      For some (very small) versions of read. There isn't some guy sitting in Google Headquarters whose job is to personally read all of your email. No one at Google has probably ever ACTUALLY read a single email of yours. There is though a mindless computer crunching through all the words in your email forming associations. I'm not going to worry about this until computers are sentient, and even at that point I won't worry too much because I perfectly realize that 99% (I'm being generous) of my email is banal to the point of tears.

      Sure, if your using your email for internal, important and confidential, corporate email, or for super-serious military hanky-panky, or something seriously dubious (like terrorism dubious. not "d00d teh p1rate b4y r0x!"), then eschew gMail, and all other mail services like it (Yahoo, Hotmail, etc..). Otherwise, there is no real security problem.

      No, I don't really trust Google, I trust them more than most corporation, but that doesn't amount to much. I just don't really care if some mindless robot sniffs me talking to my girlfriend about where to eat this weekend, or if a program gets wind of my uber-secret nefarious lol-cat trading ring.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    26. Re:Privacy by somersault · · Score: 1

      Wrong and illegal are different things for a start. If you do have something worthy of hiding, then fine - hide it. But most people really don't. Their lives are as boring as soup.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    27. Re:Privacy by somersault · · Score: 1

      btw by things "worthy of hiding" I mean dissent in a totalitarian regime and such.

      "If I do nothing wrong, why should I be watched" is like saying we'd be better off without Police patrols or CCTV. I'd much rather have some deterrent for criminals. It is wrong to invade people's private space yes, but when you are online you are not in a private space any more than you are when you're walking down the street or being filmed by security inside a store.

      *insert stupid quote by some American ex-president about liberty and security and sacrifices and deserving neither here*

      Life is always about finding a balance. Not letting things get too far towards 100% "liberty" (which would simply be Anarchy), and not letting things get too far towards a Police state. Obviously some people do do things that are wrong, and there is no guarantee of knowing who these people are beforehand. It is good to have logs/monitoring in place so that when people do break the law, they can be held accountable.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    28. Re:Privacy by icebraining · · Score: 1

      "If I do nothing wrong, why should I be watched" is like saying we'd be better off without Police patrols or CCTV

      I also dislike CCTVs (in public property, not private, those are fine). Police patrols are OK because they don't follow you. They wouldn't be OK if they was a patrol in every street corner.

      It is wrong to invade people's private space yes, but when you are online you are not in a private space any more than you are when you're walking down the street or being filmed by security inside a store.

      Even if you are walking down the street, stalking is illegal. Of course, people can see you passing by, but following you and watching your every movement is not OK.
      Store cameras are different, you're only under surveillance while under their property, and sane personal data protection laws will prevent them from sharing that footage.
      ISPs are mere carriers (even though they don't have that legal status) and shouldn't look at your traffic more than the Post office people should open your mail.

      Exceptions should be made in specific cases by court order.

      Life is always about finding a balance. Not letting things get too far towards 100% "liberty" (which would simply be Anarchy), and not letting things get too far towards a Police state.

      I agree, but in my opinion, privacy should be the rule, with some exceptions, not the other way around.

      Obviously some people do do things that are wrong, and there is no guarantee of knowing who these people are beforehand. It is good to have logs/monitoring in place so that when people do break the law, they can be held accountable.

      Site logs are OK, as long as they're not distributed to other people. ISP logs should only be put in place if the police and judge suspects an individual is breaking the law.

      btw by things "worthy of hiding" I mean dissent in a totalitarian regime and such.

      Instead of a quote from an ex-president, I give you one from Whitfield Diffie, someone we geeks should value :)
      "If you say to people that they, as a matter of fact, can't protect their conversations, in particular their political conversations, I think you take a long step toward making a transition from a free society to a totalitarian society."

    29. Re:Privacy by somersault · · Score: 1

      Store cameras are different, you're only under surveillance while under their property, and sane personal data protection laws will prevent them from sharing that footage.

      The Police request CCTV footage from us all the time and I'm told to hand it over to them, even though we're a private company. When you're in public, you're likely traceable.

      Likewise you don't have to be watched all the time online for people to be able to trace your movements, they can request info from your ISP if there is a valid reason to. I find it weird that ISPs wouldn't keep logs on what is going through their systems as a matter of course (even if they only keep the data for a few days or something). Just because nobody is watching you all the time doesn't mean you can't be traced later.

      I didn't say that people "can't" protect their conversations, I said they should stop acting like other people shouldn't be allowed to record them if they're in a public space. If they want to protect their information transfer there are plenty of secure options available. I don't think any of these things should be banned (as they are very important for general security as well as privacy), but I also think that someone who wants every single thing they do to be encrypted or hidden away no matter how trivial it is, is quite simply a paranoid moron.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    30. Re:Privacy by WNight · · Score: 1

      Otherwise, there is no real security problem.

      Facts are facts, the security problem is up to you.

      No one at Google has probably ever ACTUALLY read a single email of yours. There is though a mindless computer crunching through all the words in your email forming associations.

      Um yeah, thanks. Got that... Had you thought that I thought they used pigeons? Or gnomes under NDAs? Sentient computers?

      I just don't really care if some mindless robot sniffs me talking to my girlfriend about where to eat this weekend, or if a program gets wind of my uber-secret nefarious lol-cat trading ring.

      Didn't ask, thanks. Don't need to be told that you have nothing to hide.

  5. Surf's Up! by MarbleMunkey · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously, though, I consider myself a reasonably bright software programmer, and I'm still unsure exactly what it is I'm supposed to be using Goole Wave for. Maybe I just don't communicate with enough people via electronic means...

    1. Re:Surf's Up! by John+Hasler · · Score: 5, Funny

      > I'm still unsure exactly what it is I'm supposed to be using Google Wave
      > for.

      The video makes that quite clear: creating a hideous garbled mess of crap.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    2. Re:Surf's Up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL, yeah. I kinda got that impression too.
        A garbled heap of other peoples' crap.

      And Chrome on top of it. Yuck.

    3. Re:Surf's Up! by zwei2stein · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Obligatory version of video that is actually cool: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HePWBNcugf8&feature=related

      --
      -- Technology for the sake of technology is as pathetic as eschewing technology because it's technology.
    4. Re:Surf's Up! by Laserwulf · · Score: 1

      I could see Wave being used for event planning among friends/family. Being able to post maps, photos, and other widgets would make it an alternative to Facebook events.

      Or... group projects for HS/college classes would be easier than emailing updates to a single document back&forth among 6 people. (Yes, there are ways like shared online storage, but Wave allows for simultaneous editing.)

      --
      "Make cyberlove, not cyberwar!" -Khaed(544779)
    5. Re:Surf's Up! by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So it's basically like MySpace then?

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    6. Re:Surf's Up! by sunderland56 · · Score: 1

      The only reason I can think of: to avoid SEC regulations on the retention of email.

      In other words: if you want to have a company discussion, electronically, but avoid all record of it in case the government comes snooping: use Wave. Otherwise, just use email as usual. And yes, I'm sure that the SEC will catch on eventually, but for a few years, you're golden.

    7. Re:Surf's Up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Enter the wonderful world of instante messaging that existed years before Google Wave and also feel free to use the thing called phone sometimes too.

    8. Re:Surf's Up! by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      It is a communication tool...if anything a programmer would know less about it than a teenage girl. ;-)

      That said if you do have a decent team and wave it is a good way to sling data back and forth to each other.

    9. Re:Surf's Up! by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      More crap.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    10. Re:Surf's Up! by Tom · · Score: 1

      Yes, same here. After initial excitement, I've tried using it for some things.

      Turns out that it's an ok replacement for IM, since it keeps the history and allows non-linear editing (i.e. I can go back and put a comment to an earlier statement of yours, and it'll be put into the correct place). Also for having IMs with multiple people, while keeping the option of having sub-threads with just a part of them.

      But as a replacement for e-mail, especially mailing lists, if you have more than 2 people in the conversation? It becomes really cumbersome really quickly.

      It desperately needs some kind of archiving or aging, to cut the current conversation down to what is still relevant. As of right now, I feel like starting a new wave every week, but since you can't "carry over" context, that means starting anew.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    11. Re:Surf's Up! by juanjux · · Score: 1

      I've been finding real uses for Google Wave and I'm liking it a lot. I'm also a programmer. I've used it with great success to do some "agile" style development for some projects I work on as freelance (read: all weekend bugfixing at home to finish a project for monday) and coordinate the tasks to be done with other programmers and designers.

      Because usually the list of tasks isn't fixed but the programmer/designer finds new things to fix or implement as they're working on fixing the previous ones (for example: you notice you'll need to install a third party module => "install module X in Y", the module has a bug => "fix bug in module X", etc...), the wiki-style editting capabilities of Wave are great, everyone updates his tasks, everyone can add comments on them (and delete them later) and everyone knows what the others are working on.

      I've also used it for informal chitchat with friends, like the "LOST" example above. The threads are a lot easier to follow than emails with several people on the CC, but is also "asynchronous" unlike Jabber/MSN.

      I've a wave with some friends were we attach every ebook we buy so we all share them with just one of us paying for every title (which is legal in my country BTW).

      Mmmm... more uses... oh yes, I've used it to write drafts for articles before publishing them on my site (again, the RTE is much better than emailing and remailing you for that.)

      Using is too as personal notes manager (using tags.)

      Things that MUST improve the make wave perfect:

      - Performance on threads with hundreds of messages (blips).
      - Drop the pseudo-MDI GUI, which I hate, and use something more like Gmail.
      - Allow you to receive your email inside Google Wave and reply from there so I could stop using Gmail entirely.
      - A good Android/iPhone native app (the web sucks on mobile devices currently.)

  6. SahrePoint alternative by Itninja · · Score: 1

    I remember when Wave was first being mentioned as a replacement for SharePoint Server (MOSS). Not sure if it's still thought of that way. From what I've seen in Wave, I doubt it could do the same job....

    --
    I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
    1. Re:SahrePoint alternative by IICV · · Score: 1

      A braindead monkey with an abacus could replace Sharepoint, and at least when the monkey poops all over your documents you can scrape some of them off.

      Seriously, there are literally no upsides to Sharepoint. Your users won't be empowered, they'll just be confused; your administrators won't have a smaller workload, they'll have a greater one - they'll need to do whatever tasks they normally have, plus clean up after the confused users, and figure out ways to work around the features Sharepoint just doesn't have, like column or row level security. Need to make it so that only one group can modify a column? Tough luck. You'll need to buy someone else's solution for that, it's not built in to Sharepoint. Need to secure a document dropoff area so users can only see their own documents, but you must allow multiple document uploads? There no way to do that; you can only half-ass it.

    2. Re:SahrePoint alternative by Itninja · · Score: 1

      Almost nothing is 'built-in' to SharePoint. SharePoint is a platform, not an application. The ability to allow 3rd party applications to be written and dropped into SP is the upside. Another big upside is native integration with Office applications and Active Directory.

      SharePoint can suck fantastically though, it's true. This is often (always?) due to admins or engineers who think of it as some kind of installable app. Poor implementation, along with poor governance (i.e. "Hey Bill, you can be the 'SharePoint guy'...m'kay?"), and minimal knowledge can make a SharePoint environment the worst thing ever.

      And BTW, you can do exactly what you are describing with file security with SharePoint (I have). You not knowing how != impossible.

      --
      I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
  7. Yes, open to all... by tarsi210 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...and still just as useless. Well, ok -- non-realtime collaborative efforts, perhaps. Brainstormings. Things like that.

    But after it takes you 3 years to get everyone on Google, set up, working right (damned ad-block), etc. and THEN you can start working together -- oh, but wait, half the people don't know how to use Wave, so you have to teach them how to use it -- yes, dammit, it's more than just IM, it's all sorts of...oh, read the docs, won't you? -- THEN you can finally get down to working on the pro....

    What? You have to go? Oh, I guess we DID spend the entire 2-hour meeting setting this crap up. Fine, reschedule for another day. AND ON A PHONE THIS TIME.

    1. Re:Yes, open to all... by Pojut · · Score: 1

      What? You have to go? Oh, I guess we DID spend the entire 2-hour meeting setting this crap up.

      Sounds par-for-the-course for Arkham Horror night at our apartment :p

    2. Re:Yes, open to all... by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      Have you tried it recently? Its significantly improved. Yes it DID suck last year.

    3. Re:Yes, open to all... by inerlogic · · Score: 1

      par for the course? newb...

    4. Re:Yes, open to all... by Pojut · · Score: 1

      We just got the game a month ago, clod!

    5. Re:Yes, open to all... by radtea · · Score: 1

      Get "The King in Yellow" expansion. Most perfectly balanced co-operative game ever.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    6. Re:Yes, open to all... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now it blows!

    7. Re:Yes, open to all... by quintesse · · Score: 1

      I still think they should just integrate it somehow with GMail like they did for Buzz

    8. Re:Yes, open to all... by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      Half the people using it (ie project managers) in my team are completely useless with computers and they got it in less than a day and were creating their own waves with little intervention from me. It takes all of about 2 minutes with people to show them how to use it. Certainly easier to learn than MS word or even outlook.

    9. Re:Yes, open to all... by slim · · Score: 1

      ...and still just as useless. Well, ok -- non-realtime collaborative efforts, perhaps. Brainstormings. Things like that.

      You mean it's useless, except for the things it's made for?

    10. Re:Yes, open to all... by slim · · Score: 1

      But after it takes you 3 years to get everyone on Google, set up, working right (damned ad-block), etc. and THEN you can start working together -- oh, but wait, half the people don't know how to use Wave, so you have to teach them how to use it -- yes, dammit, it's more than just IM, it's all sorts of...oh, read the docs, won't you? -- THEN you can finally get down to working on the pro....

      I had the same issues trying to bootstrap the use of staff email at a high school in the late 1990s.

      Of course, nowadays you'd have a hard time finding an email naysayer. People know what it's good for, know what it's bad for, and use it accordingly.

    11. Re:Yes, open to all... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This comment makes no sense. Adopting any new technology is going to have a learning curve. You're complaining because it isn't the same as existing technologies that people already know? Pointless.

      I suppose you also thing the new fangled email technology is also a waste of time, since people have to learn how to use it. Thank goodness we're all born knowing how to use the phone.

  8. wave by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shiny

  9. To quote Triumph by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Shhh, shhh, shhh, listen, listen closely, hear that? It's the sound of nobody giving a shit!"

  10. big deal by larry+bagina · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    google just open sourced vp8. That means we can stop eating the ogg theora shit sandwich and start using a codec that doesn't suck ass.

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    1. Re:big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A first in depth analysis of VP8 for those interested. It also includes screenshots comparing it with other formats.

    2. Re:big deal by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      Open source doesn't mean anything when the codec can still be patented and then we get into patent messes.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  11. Still 'beta' though, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Last I checked, you still can't upload an avatar and nobody wanted one of the 30-ish invites I had on my account. Compared to dedicated webapps (eg: project management, bug tracking, photo sharing, file sharing, email, blogs, CMS and forums) it could be used for the lot, but only by dim-fools who remain ignorant of the greatly superior alternatives availiable. Other than that, it's an amusing XSS platform. Where we used to fuck with people on IRC, kids these days will do it via Google Wave.

    I suspect that the only real "waving" new users will be doing is bye-bye to this over-glorified web site.

    1. Re:Still 'beta' though, right? by icebraining · · Score: 1

      Last I checked, you still can't upload an avatar

      Click the avatar placeholder, "edit profile", a wave with your profile opens, click the new "edit profile", click "change picture".

  12. Re:Does anybody have any links to news sites? by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

    Um, how is /. NSFW? There was a video clearly demonstrating Pulp Fiction done with Google Wave which was clearly labeled as NSWF. Unless you click on the play button, everything is perfectly safe for work. Just don't click links where you don't want to go (stay away from any link with goat in its name...) and /. is perfectly work safe.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  13. Nothing Fucking Wrong With Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuckin' A!

  14. Do not tell me about this wave thing... by bogaboga · · Score: 1

    ....till I can send an email right from the wave interface. Why is this still impossible? Google, wake up!

    1. Re:Do not tell me about this wave thing... by MisterZimbu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This.

      Google Wave has to actually be forwards and backwards compatible with e-mails if it ever stands a chance of replacing it. That means people seamlessly being about to send e-mails to myaddress@googlewave.com and having them appear in my inbox, and having my replies (as waves) send out e-mails as replies if any of the participants in the wave is an "e-mail" participant.

      And bots really don't count. It has to be tightly integrated into the system.

    2. Re:Do not tell me about this wave thing... by pilot1 · · Score: 1

      What would "tightly integrating" it into the system do that a bot can't?

    3. Re:Do not tell me about this wave thing... by slasho81 · · Score: 1

      Same thing with Instant Messaging. If they want Wave to replace IM in the future it must be compatible with the common IM networks today, or at the very least XMPP.

    4. Re:Do not tell me about this wave thing... by sourcerror · · Score: 1

      Google Talk is compatible as far as I know. Would be surprised if they use sg different on the server side.

    5. Re:Do not tell me about this wave thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It'll have all that. It's XMPP under the hood, and there's been talk from day one of XMPP possibly getting e-mail plugins eventually since it supports offline messaging. I really think it's going to be most popular in business, but once people get used to it there, they'll want it to be the way they regularly do e-mail at home. I have to admit that I find wave not so useful right now, but that's only because there aren't many people on it. With everyone I know using it, it sure would be better than e-mail.

  15. Been using it for months by Ngarrang · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have been using Google Wave for months now. It works well once you figure out how to use it and for what you can use it effectively. I have been using it to collaborate with fellow musicians. In real-time, we hammer out lyrics, instruments parts, ideas, etc. Record something, most the MP3, share the bits that way, and the guy that is the best with the mixing software does the final mixes, shares the results. It has been fast and effective.

    --
    Bearded Dragon
    1. Re:Been using it for months by natehoy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think the beauty, and problem, of Wave is that it's very unstructured. It can be exactly what you want it to be, but if you don't know what you want you'll just end up with a mess. People approach it like project management software, or Instant Messenger, or email, or some concept they are used to, and discover that the people they are collaborating with are using it based on another concept.

      Wave is like a big box of Lego. You can build some really cool stuff with it, if you know what you want to build up front. It can build things more easily and conveniently than many other tools. But if you just start mashing pieces together without a shared vision of what you are doing, it's a complete clusterfuck.

      Well, that, and once you get past a few hundred collaborators or a few hundred posts on a specific Wave, the software slows down to a bind-bogglingly-painful crawl. But for small collaboration projects, it's quite good. If all of you decide how you are going to use it up-front.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    2. Re:Been using it for months by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 3, Funny

      I have been using Google Wave for months now.
      It works well once you figure out how to use it and for what you can use it effectively....

      I thought the same thing about my penis.
      Admittedly, I can't share MP3s with it, like Google Wave, but other collaboration is a go...

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    3. Re:Been using it for months by Phil(i+think) · · Score: 1

      Can i just have the big box of lego instead?

    4. Re:Been using it for months by oatworm · · Score: 1

      I call mine a "flash drive". It's "plug-and-play" compatible and can be inserted and removed from compatible ports smoothly and easily. Unfortunately, since it uses a FAT file system, it's rather prone to corruption; proper mounting and dismounting procedure minimizes this somewhat. On the other hand, if small and fast is the way of the future, it's several generations ahead of the curve!

    5. Re:Been using it for months by gox · · Score: 1

      I thought the same thing about my penis.
      Admittedly, I can't share MP3s with it, like Google Wave, but other collaboration is a go...

      Well, but you can.

    6. Re:Been using it for months by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how many rights to what you've been working on have you donated to Google by virtue of using their service?

    7. Re:Been using it for months by Ngarrang · · Score: 1

      None. Just because we've exchanged messages about our music, Google doesn't any ownership of it, nor could they justify so in a court of law.

      --
      Bearded Dragon
    8. Re:Been using it for months by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Wave is like a big box of Lego. You can build some really cool stuff with it, if you know what you want to build up front. It can build things more easily and conveniently than many other tools.

      So long as what you want to build can usefully be built with Legos. If you need steel, or glass, or rubber, or bits and bytes... you're screwed.
       

      But if you just start mashing pieces together without a shared vision of what you are doing, it's a complete clusterfuck.

      Most people want a tool that works - not a Glorious Shared Vision. And again, that's where Google Wave falls short. It doesn't really work all that well, it has a very abstruse and esoteric interface, and it doesn't scale.

    9. Re:Been using it for months by Kashgarinn · · Score: 1

      The REAL problem with wave not being understood is that it's a PROTOCOL.. it's not this crap google made which is half-forum-half-email-half-instant messenger.. it's a protocol for live updates of text (so far).

      What this means is that you can make an email program which uses this protocol, or you could make a wiki which uses this protocol, or you could make a spreadsheet program which uses this protocol, or a word editor program, a photoshop program, hell, you could make an OS that uses this protocol.

      That would mean
      1) no more locked files for editing when 2 or more people are using the same file
      2) any file is inherently available for collaboration, instant collaboration because you see the changes instantly, and not incrementally (i.e. after you press enter).
      3) anything you do is saved on a server instantly, in a timeline, so no more "oh fuck, I forgot to save"

      I'll shout it out now. STOP LOOKING AT GOOGLE WAVE AS AN APPLICATION, look at it as an underlying protocol which has serious benefits, and remake every program you're used to use with it, the benefits are worth it.

      K.

  16. WTF? by chill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Someone explain to my why whomever it was felt it was okay to transcribe half the curse words in the English language, but had to leave out "God Damn"?

    Fuck him like a bitch is okay.
    Mutherfuckaaa is okay.
    All the rest is okay, but "God Damn" is censored?

    Pussies.

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    1. Re:WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ;\pussies

    2. Re:WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well God never said cussing was a sin. You just can't use his name in vain.

    3. Re:WTF? by game+kid · · Score: 1

      They're obviously scared of spreading a Chris Tucker meme.

      --
      You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
    4. Re:WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone explain to my why whomever it was felt it was okay to transcribe half the curse words in the English language, but had to leave out "God Damn"?

      For the same reason you typically attempt to spell the words in your post properly: To avoid pissing people off.

      All the rest is okay, but "God Damn" is censored?

      It's not about curse words having a score, it's for religious reasons, sorta like why you'd never call Captain Picard a Jedi or describe your single server as being a 'cloud' around here.

      Honestly, guys, this is not obscure. It may or may not be rational, but it's not a mystery. You're modding up ignorance.

    5. Re:WTF? by pablodiazgutierrez · · Score: 1

      I believe his point was pointing out the permeating nature of religious puritanism of this country, even in some of the most educated social circles, such as the high tech industry.

    6. Re:WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I believe his point was pointing out the permeating nature of religious puritanism of this country...

      It was really bold of him to attempt to point that out by not pointing it out at all and instead sounding like he doesn't have the vaguest idea of what he's talking about.

      ...even in some of the most educated social circles...

      We know the difference between wi-fi and hi-fi. That's not 'educated'. We noisily raise decades-old complaints (a good chunk of them found in old Calvin and Hobbes cartoons...) then pat ourselves on the back as if we were the first to notice the perceived inconsistency. 'Educated' people would have attempted to answer the question themselves before spewing it noisly on a web forum. Heck, a truely educated person would use question marks to actually ask questions.

    7. Re:WTF? by lennier · · Score: 1

      you'd never call Captain Picard a Jedi

      I find your lack of tea, Earl Grey, disturbing.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    8. Re:WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you a member of SFM?

    9. Re:WTF? by neutralstone · · Score: 1

      Well God never said cussing was a sin. You just can't use his name in vain.

      Funny; I tend to think of the word "god" as being a title rather than a name. It's like "lord", "captain", "sir", "lieutenant", etc. By contrast, *names* of gods include "Aphrodite", "Loki", "Yahweh", "Kal-El", "Amaterasu", etc.

      I was going to put "Papa Smurf" in the second list when I realized that's not a proper name either.

      That's right: Papa Smurf. Bow down and praise him, bitches!

    10. Re:WTF? by gr8dude · · Score: 1

      I think it was a profoundly religious person who didn't want to write the string "god" because they thought they'd end up in hell for doing that.

      Isn't that obvious? :-)

    11. Re:WTF? by chill · · Score: 1

      It is called subtlety. Specifically a rhetorical question pointing out what is frequently perceived as hypocrisy by many. Yes, it has been pointed out before but since the behavior continues the pointing continues.

      What you're suggesting could have been accomplished much more effectively by the method used by many observant Jews and written as "G-d". A more humorous approach would have been to insert a quick visual of one of Monty Python's images of God smiting someone from Holy Grail, essentially a visual metonym. But totally ignoring it was simply an act of cowardice and hypocrisy.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    12. Re:WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is called subtlety. Specifically a rhetorical question pointing out what is frequently perceived as hypocrisy by many.

      It's called "not understanding what you're talking about". If you did understand it, you'd understand why it isn't hypocrisy. Instead, possibly, you'd be questioning its rationality. I would even be willing to bet you wouldn't have posted that if Slashdot didn't put the word 'Insightful' next to posts like that.

  17. unfair advantage by digitalsushi · · Score: 1

    This wave demo uses kinetic typography to make it (more) interesting. Google wave is interesting, but this cake was delivered with frosting I didn't ask for.

    --
    slashdot: where everyone yells sarcastic metaphors to themselves to understand the issue
  18. Gotta agree with parent... by Qubit · · Score: 1

    No, this [webmproject.org] is the link you're looking for.

    Okay, I think that MrHanky might actually be spot-on this time (and not those kinds of spots...he leaves those all the time).

    I mean, have you heard of the WebM project before? From the WebM FAQ:

    Are VP8 or WebM subject to change?

    The VP8 and WebM specifications as released on May 19th, 2010 are final.

    Correct me if I'm missing something, but this looks like breaking news as of today...

    And most critically:

    WebM and VP8 are open-source. How do I get the source and contribute code?

    The code, specifications and development guidelines are available on our Code page.

    See that? VP8 [is] open-source. How could they possibly say that unless.... Google just released VP8?

    Nicely done, Google, nicely done!

    --

    coding is life /* the rest is */
  19. I like this demonstration better by moco · · Score: 1
    --
    moi
    1. Re:I like this demonstration better by ngc5194 · · Score: 1

      What I find interesting is that I actually learned more about how to use Wave from this one than from the Pulp Fiction demo.

  20. Brainstorming? by nitsew · · Score: 1

    I am not so sure I would want google to see/store any brainstorming my company is doing. I know they are not evil, and have great privacy policies... wait... what?

    1. Re:Brainstorming? by nj_peeps · · Score: 1

      I can see this only really taking off, if they completely open the rest of the code (web front end) so that each company could run their own fully functional wave server. Then you wouldn't have to worry bout Google's privacy (or lack there of) policies. I seem to remember them saying something about this in the kickoff from last year's IO...

      --
      "Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security" --Benjamin Franklin
    2. Re:Brainstorming? by Daengbo · · Score: 1

      There are now multiple implementations of the federated server protocol, and Google is releasing client APIs so that anyone could write a client.

  21. And nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And nothing of value was gained.

  22. Re:Does anybody have any links to news sites? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nothing new to see here. Think before you follow a link offsite, just like in the goatse days. At least you were warned about the content on the other side this time.

  23. Proof of concept by ScottyMcScott · · Score: 0

    This video proved Google wave can become 4chan 2.0.

  24. not like myspace by jDeepbeep · · Score: 1

    So it's basically like MySpace then?

    It's a 'real-time' collaboration tool / toolkit. You could build forum software that leverages Wave functionality, however.

    --
    Reply to That ||
  25. NSFW by jDeepbeep · · Score: 1

    Um, how is /. NSFW?

    Because when I am on /. I am supposed to be working, but I am on /. instead.

    --
    Reply to That ||
  26. The Media-soaked Mind by Dripdry · · Score: 1

    Holy shit, it's like they were able to see inside my mind for 5 minutes!
    I don't know if I should feel scared, in awe, or just regard Wave as another amusing internet sprocket. I can't say I've contributed anything to this discussion other than "Hey that's really COOL!"

    --
    -
    1. Re:The Media-soaked Mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy shit, it's like they were able to see inside my mind for 5 minutes!
      I don't know if I should feel scared, in awe, or just regard Wave as another amusing internet sprocket. I can't say I've contributed anything to this discussion other than "Hey that's really COOL!"

      Feel ashamed of being a nonfunny asshole.

  27. I stand corrected by BitZtream · · Score: 1

    It is now listed on my non-premier account as a service I can add.

    It really wasn't there an hour ago, thats the first thing I went to do.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    1. Re:I stand corrected by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      I hope that means mine is coming soon too.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    2. Re:I stand corrected by dAzED1 · · Score: 1

      I'll give it a little more time to appear on my standard account then...

  28. Never join a Club by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never join a club that will have you as a member. The elite Google invitation only betas - GMail was the worst - give you time to decide that whatever it was you can really live without it.

  29. First look at Wave by Twinbee · · Score: 1

    As has been said before, Gwave hopes to replace email, forums, IRC and other types of communications systems.

    I've just now, tried Wave for the first time, and it seems very interesting. I'd love this (or at least something) to be *the* standard for emails and forums etc.

    In terms of features, I kind of wish there was an in-place search filter that filters in real-time only the messages in that wave that contain a certain word/phrase. Also, if it's not going to have skins, then can it at least let me change the colour scheme?

    The above points are mute in a way though, since as Wave is a protocol, expect to see some great custom GUIs in the future (maybe some are already available).

    --
    Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
    1. Re:First look at Wave by am+2k · · Score: 1

      The above points are mute in a way though, since as Wave is a protocol, expect to see some great custom GUIs in the future (maybe some are already available).

      Unfortunately, it's not that simple. Google only provides a spec for server2server communication, the communication between server and client is not specified. The protocol their own implementation (which is open source) uses is very Google- and Javascript-specific and unlikely to be viable for other clients.

      In summary, this means that everybody who wants to implement a client has also to implement the server, which is far from trivial.

  30. I use it a lot for note taking by melted · · Score: 1

    I like what they're doing with rich text editing, and I like the "playback" feature. For collaboration, I think it has two main flaws:
    1. It's hard to catch up after you haven't seen a wave for a while. Harder than email for sure.
    2. It's too "realtime". I don't want people to start replying to me before I finish my message.

  31. What ... ? by smcdow · · Score: 1

    that video ... what?

    --
    In the course of every project, it will become necessary to shoot the scientists and begin production.
  32. Am I the only one... by 6Yankee · · Score: 1

    ...who watched that video and now has even less idea what the point is?

    1. Re:Am I the only one... by AthleteMusicianNerd · · Score: 1

      The more pointless it is means the more successful it will be in our society of idiocracy.

  33. Hell No- I Won't go! by cffrost · · Score: 1, Funny

    The link you actually care about
    http://wave.google.com/

    Haha yeah, that's the link you care about if your some kinda AOL newbie saving up to help that Nigerian prince. Nice try BitZtream, but I seriously doubt anyone on Slashdot fell for it! =)

    Anyway, here's the real link guys, for geeks that care about their dignity:

    https://wave.google.com/wave/

    --
    Thank you, Edward Snowden.

    "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
    1. Re:Hell No- I Won't go! by cffrost · · Score: 1

      See what I'm talking about? "-1 Flamebait" for endorsing widespread encryption: security and freedom in the same package. If Slashdot had a even a free, self-signed certificate, my post wouldn't have been sniffed and censored while being routed through *.gov.cn.

      It's either that, or I hit a little too close to home for some late-adopting AOL customer to whom, by sheer misfortune, was victimized by that dastardly prince. In that case, I'm weally, weally sowwy widdle guy. =(

      Weally. =(

      --
      Thank you, Edward Snowden.

      "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
  34. Re:Does anybody have any links to news sites? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about you do your job instead, or less hours of it? Not only shouldn't websites be "safe for (pretending to) work", the whole NSFW should be dropped. If you're bored on your job, share it with someone else. Too much unemployment to really care about people who bitch about how they can't get their fix of distraction while they get paid to do nothing.

  35. Spammers by AthleteMusicianNerd · · Score: 1

    Clearly they did exactly what Twitter did (who just stripped down myspace), now if they can only keep message like "Do you love me? Vote at www.ImAVagina.com" off of it.

  36. Just a wiki by tbird20d · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Is it just me, or is Wave just a fancy wiki?

    1. Re:Just a wiki by pforhan · · Score: 1

      Yes it is. And it is also chat (jabber). And some other things.

      But in practice, it seems to do best as a wiki-like thing.

  37. And strangers on your contact list by Snaller · · Score: 1

    And yay, googles great software places strangers on my contact list (and NO they are not in the other contact list (you know the one where they automatically add everybody you just think about)) should have stayed in beta.

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  38. they can, by v4vijayakumar · · Score: 1

    1. provide a wave interface for their google groups
    2. make it as a glue technology, and provide a way to link all social networks, blogs, etc.
    3. bring it inside gmail (like buzz), of course allow us to turn it off

    and then what,

    profit.

  39. "By invite only" launch killed Wave by willutah · · Score: 1

    Although the "by invite only" strategy worked for gmail, I think this is what has ultimately killed (or at least maimed) Wave. Too many people tried it out, were pretty excited, but then realized they couldn't talk to anyone they knew, and getting an invite to the people they knew was only by the unpredictable grace of Google. This time the invite-only strategy was a buzzkill. This is probably a case of Catch 22 though because if they had launched it with open access to all it probably would have been slashdotted.

    At this point, opening it up to everyone is probably a sign that most people have given up on it and Google recognizes that it won't cause much of a murmur on the servers since few will sign-up. One of the real sticking points for me is that you cannot permanently delete a wave. Sure it goes in the trash, but there is no way to empty the trash. Google should at least give us the illusion of privacy by at least making it appear like we can delete content tied to us!

  40. Tabletop gaming by theVP · · Score: 1

    I'm really looking forward to using this for tabletop gaming. I'd like to see someone come up with an extension for drawing maps quickly, because everything else you need, is there. You can slip notes to the players, have everyone working on separate things at once, roll dice (with modifiers), and all from your browser. The interface is almost limitless in what it can do for a DM/GM. I would agree that the practicality is lacking in the business world, but this thing is going to be a major hit for tabletop gaming.

    --
    "No one is more miserable than the person who wills everything and can do nothing." -Emperor Claudius 10 BC - AD 54
  41. Luv Murrell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's pretty cool. I'm using it to re-visit a story I wrote a while back and I'm finding that my initial vision works pretty with it. embedded in my blog http://bit.ly/atDkqN