With the upsurge of Dot Com businesses advertising on TV, I've noticed that none of them call themselves WWW DOT SOMEBUSINESS DOT COM, they're all just SOMEBUSINESS DOT COM.
It seems to me then, that it's essential UI for sites to display when referred to without the WWW prefix. Many, including UseIt.Com do not. See http://useit.com.
The media are piling onto the tech slump story in the same way they piled on the boom story. It doesn't mean that either were particularly true.
The dotcom companies that arose in the last few years were bloated and often nonsensical, but you didn't read too many articles critical of them before the NASDAQ took a dive.
It just brings me back to the conclusion that very few members of the media have a real understanding about what's going on, which may be ironic if you consider that it's the Internet that will over time erode the power of the mass media. You'd think they'd be keenly interested.
Counterpane has a paper out called Electronic Commerce and the Street Performer Protocol. http://www.counterpane.com/street_performer.html In abstract it suggests a protocol where private donors could place contributions in escrow until such a date as the proposed project is completed or dies from missed deadlines. If the project is released into the public domain, the payments go to the author, if not they return to the donors. The ad campaign on gwbush.com is operating on a similar premise. They buy anti-Bush ads as soon as enough money has been raised to pay for them. Very interesting stuff . . .
I love that Apu scene where we learn he has a Computer Science Ph.D. He pulls out his stack of punch cards for a Solitaire program or something. Dr. Finkelman: "Computers will get bigger and bigger until only the richest kings of Europe will be able to afford them."
I've hit a redirect from a spam email in the first Netscape suite with email included, 2.0 I think. It launched a Web browser and pulled up a spam page. As I recall it was a redirect brought about via JavaScript.
The Allies weren't plagued with doubt about cracking into the Nazi lines of communications and control. Just because those lines are now more sophisticated, doesn't make it more or less ethical to do so. If cracking a box saves lives then the military has a duty to do it. Furthermore, the military has an obligation to defend itself from a similar attack, especially with our tech-heavy weapon systems. It's just that in this country we expect them to do so without compromising domestic rights and freedoms in the process. The question becomes, should they crack your box to learn some scant bit of information about a Serbian box?
It's important to remember that the media are like cops. They always arrive at the scene after a thing has happened. They are the first draft historians. I'm stating the obvious, but just because some thing doesn't get any media attention doesn't make it less worthwhile and vice versa. The media has a pack mentality, a self-replicating tendancy. That makes it hard to adjust the course they're on. But once a story really takes hold, it will spread like a bush fire.
ESR makes a fly-by of an interesting parallel between open source development and the media.
He says: "If you know that thousands of people will be scrutinizing your work and that the errors you make will almost certainly be spotted, and if you care about your reputation, then you will take great pains to create error-free work."
This is the same dynamic encountered by reputable and successful journalists. To me that suggests that the press and open source development have much more in common than initially meets the eye.
Not only that, considering source code as speech would also serve to move software from the realm of patents into the realm of copyright where it makes a bit more sense to put it.
I run two political web sites, Ventura Files and the newly launched GeorgeW.Net. The question that springs to my mind is who is contribution to? If I criticize a politician, that is not necessarily an endorsement of the opposition.
Political speech has always been free speech. Now, because I'm using technology to amplify my speech I will need to register with the government? A Web site operator should enjoy the same protection that a newspaper publisher enjoys. There's plenty of political speech in the Op/Ed pages, but you don't see them registering as PAC's. And a newspaper is an enormous capital outlay compared to a Web server.
This doesn't sound right. I'm going to have to call my representatives.
This is a link to a list of Minnesota attorneys who practice intellectual property law and were voted among the best in their field by other attorneys in Minnesota. It may not be that helpful to non-Minnesotans, but several of the firms mentioned are national and might be expected to practice in this legal area in your geo area.
Everyone listens to Reason
on
Snow Crash
·
· Score: 1
Snow Crash is more cartoony than Cryptonomicon. I really enjoyed his treatment of the unchecked growth of strip mall culture. He brings it up as the "loglo" that lights the steets.
Paraphrasing: There are only four things that Americans do better than anyone else: music, movies, microcode and high-speed pizza delivery.
There's nothing terribly secret about where the plot is heading, but it's not the kind of book where suspense is important. It's an enjoyable but quick read.
Slashdot Mirror
It seems to me then, that it's essential UI for sites to display when referred to without the WWW prefix. Many, including UseIt.Com do not. See http://useit.com.
Do you agree?
See Feed Mag for a send up of this very topic. It's set in 2004 and Amazon is still around, but it's selling shelter and berries.
The media are piling onto the tech slump story in the same way they piled on the boom story. It doesn't mean that either were particularly true.
The dotcom companies that arose in the last few years were bloated and often nonsensical, but you didn't read too many articles critical of them before the NASDAQ took a dive.
It just brings me back to the conclusion that very few members of the media have a real understanding about what's going on, which may be ironic if you consider that it's the Internet that will over time erode the power of the mass media. You'd think they'd be keenly interested.
Counterpane has a paper out called Electronic Commerce and the Street Performer Protocol. http://www.counterpane.com/street_performer.html In abstract it suggests a protocol where private donors could place contributions in escrow until such a date as the proposed project is completed or dies from missed deadlines. If the project is released into the public domain, the payments go to the author, if not they return to the donors. The ad campaign on gwbush.com is operating on a similar premise. They buy anti-Bush ads as soon as enough money has been raised to pay for them. Very interesting stuff . . .
I love that Apu scene where we learn he has a Computer Science Ph.D. He pulls out his stack of punch cards for a Solitaire program or something. Dr. Finkelman: "Computers will get bigger and bigger until only the richest kings of Europe will be able to afford them."
I've hit a redirect from a spam email in the first Netscape suite with email included, 2.0 I think. It launched a Web browser and pulled up a spam page. As I recall it was a redirect brought about via JavaScript.
The Allies weren't plagued with doubt about cracking into the Nazi lines of communications and control. Just because those lines are now more sophisticated, doesn't make it more or less ethical to do so. If cracking a box saves lives then the military has a duty to do it. Furthermore, the military has an obligation to defend itself from a similar attack, especially with our tech-heavy weapon systems. It's just that in this country we expect them to do so without compromising domestic rights and freedoms in the process. The question becomes, should they crack your box to learn some scant bit of information about a Serbian box?
It's important to remember that the media are like cops. They always arrive at the scene after a thing has happened. They are the first draft historians. I'm stating the obvious, but just because some thing doesn't get any media attention doesn't make it less worthwhile and vice versa. The media has a pack mentality, a self-replicating tendancy. That makes it hard to adjust the course they're on. But once a story really takes hold, it will spread like a bush fire.
He says:
"If you know that thousands of people will be scrutinizing your work and that the errors you make will almost certainly be spotted, and if you care about your reputation, then you will take great pains to create error-free work."
This is the same dynamic encountered by reputable and successful journalists. To me that suggests that the press and open source development have much more in common than initially meets the eye.
See patent law for programmers discussion.
Political speech has always been free speech. Now, because I'm using technology to amplify my speech I will need to register with the government? A Web site operator should enjoy the same protection that a newspaper publisher enjoys. There's plenty of political speech in the Op/Ed pages, but you don't see them registering as PAC's. And a newspaper is an enormous capital outlay compared to a Web server.
This doesn't sound right. I'm going to have to call my representatives.
Super Lawyers: Intellectual Property & Computer Law
Paraphrasing: There are only four things that Americans do better than anyone else: music, movies, microcode and high-speed pizza delivery.
There's nothing terribly secret about where the plot is heading, but it's not the kind of book where suspense is important. It's an enjoyable but quick read.
Listen to Reason, you ought to read it.