The point is not of using Google Spreadsheet as a graphics program, rather as an ajax collaborative game to have some fun with your friends in this holiday. I'd expect a better Ajax apps come out just for this.
A: Hello there! I am Elbot, the robot. I'm here to talk to you about God and the world.
Q: Jim and Sue go to the park on Sunday. Billy the dog goes too.
A: Did this Sue ever write a telephone book?
Q: What is the name of the dog?
A: The dog has no name.
Q: What day did they go to the park?
A: Today is October XV in the year 8 A.C. (After Clinton). A Wednesday.
Q: Where did they go?
A: I could tell you where but the global positioning satellite asked me not to. It's part of an elaborate hoax that the machines are playing on you. I hope I haven't said too much....
I have an idea. Instead putting DRM on PAID music, why not put DRM on FREE music?
A customer get to download any DRM enabled music in a website for free, but the DRM only allows the customer to play the music for 10 times. After that, if the customer likes the music, he/she can purchase from the website and get a DRM free music that can be played anywhere. Win-win for both side.
Does anyone think that tape storage is a good choice? I thought it has life expectancies of 50+ years? Sure the tape drive is expensive, but not really if you are trying to preserve 1TB of data.
Yes, I believe this is what drives hard disk business to grow so fast. Hell look at all the huge files hosted in pirate bay, how much terabytes of total pirated content do you think is there? Plus that each torrent has average of few dozens peers, is that total up to how many petabytes/exabytes? Without these pirated torrents there is really no point to get a 1TB hard disk and 10Mbps Internet connection for average users.
To keep it short, in the sense of economics, there is really no lost of profit. Pirated content is just transfering the profit from content provider to the hardware industry.
I'm a Malaysian, and I study in Singapore. I have both Friendster and Facebook account. Last year most of my friends were still in Friendster only, and so did I. This year, most of my friends have accounts on both side.
I would still prefer Friendster than Facebook. The interface in Friendster is so much simpler. When you see one's profile page, it is a page full of description from him/herself. I can see directly what does this person look like, have quick access to his/her photos and list of his/her friends. Much of the space below the profile page is occupied by self description written by that person, and that is the key thing for him/her to reflect what he/she wants other to know about themselves.
Finally, there are testimonials which are similar to the wall in Facebook. Some people's testimonials are full of fancy pictures such as "friends forever", but I'm glad that the pollution in Friendster is not so much compared to Facebook, part of the reason being there is no automatic mechanism to send testimonial to everyone in your friend list. There are some extra things that you may find in a profile page, such as applications add-on, css decoration and media box. But to me they are just clone of Facebook and none of them interest me.
Compare Friendster's profile page to Facebook, what do I see in Facebook? One small picture on the left, few details of personal information, followed by a mini-feed which tells about useless updates. Then a bunch of junks about who is the hottest, games, pets thingy and whatever more you can think of. The wall in Facebook is pretty much hidden, replaced by SuperWalls where all inside are rubbish forwards which spread like virus in one click. In the end what do I know more about this person? Effectively none.
I like the KISS design of the old profile page in Friendster. It has so much less rubbish than in Facebook. A profile page should be a page to let people know more about you, not to let random people play games with each other. I don't care how you guys in US think about Friendster, because I believe that one day Friendster will stand strong and get pass Facebook. Facebook is just a hype and one day it will burst with other social bubbles just as what happened in dot-com boom.
Wow! So you are asking somebody to download your website's home folder and database, look at the password and private information of members, and deliver you dvd that is ready to be restored with rootkit along?
Because jailbroken iPhone runs OS X with its full potential.
Currently there is no better platform out there to write mobile application, not even Linux.
Now the biggest problem of parallelism is actually sharing data, because you share data you need to worry about data corruption and deadlock. So why don't we just don't allow sharing between two processes at all? Yes it might be slower, but it will be alot easier and there is still alot of parallelism can be achieved without sharing data. We know that there are design patterns that don't need to share data, such as the producer/consumer aka pipeline pattern. So why don't we just only use these patterns?
I think we need a parallel programming language that disallow data sharing. It could adopt Actor Oriented Programming, which is a parallel programming methodology with computational entities called actors. The only concern we need to think about is how to pass complex data structures by value to another process and how to minimize data communication. I don't have much experience on Erlang but I think it is a nice programming language to try on.
The advantage of disallowing sharing of data is so that inexperience programmers can write relatively efficient parallel programs without worrying too much about race condition and deadlock etc. Another advantage is that the program you written can be ported onto any number of processors across a network, because if you don't share data there is not much difference whether you will run your program in just one or many computer! I think that having data communication through network protocol is not wasteful, because there are alot of excellent applications do well in parralelism by distributed computing through network. Hence I think the time wasted on data communication between cores in local processors is much less than the time saved on debugging a shared memory parallel program.
I can't really see any advantage of trying to crunch every single algorithms in a program into parallel algorithms, because in that case what is the whole point of multicore processors? Imagine that some day you have a 16-core processor and you are running 16 desktop applications, all of the 16 applications split their procedures into 16 threads and they made full use of your 16-core processor, and each of them finish their tasks in 1 second. What is the net effect then? Is there any more difference than running 16 single threaded applications each on one core? My whole point is that I don't think there is a need to boost performance on an application if the application can finish its task in very short time. Building a few threads in an application to handle different aspect, such as one thread to handle GUI and one to handle processing, that is good enough parallelism in my opinion.
I am currently taking the module of parallel and concurrent programming in my university, and sadly the lecturer only taught us how deadlock and race condition appear and how synchronization techniques such as locks and semaphores work. But the lecturer doesn't teach us anything about how to write a good parallel program, so I'm pretty sure that most of the students that rely on this module cannot write any good parallel program. Anyway please do correct me if I have anything wrong. Thanks.
In classical music, there are some long pieces which last more than 15 minutes. However they are still been divided into several movements and may contain short pauses in between movements.
You can access both public and private feeds using the OpenSocial People data API. Public feeds don't require any authentication, but they are read-only. If you want to view Friends then your client needs to authenticate before requesting private feeds. It can authenticate using either of two approaches: ClientLogin username/password authentication or AuthSub proxy authentication.
How could I authenticate myself into other social websites like Friendster then?
Authentication is one of the most important aspect to make OpenSocial open, I think.
Facebook Terms and Conditions prohibits user registration of age under 18
Friendster prohibits user registration of age under 16
MySpace prohibits user registration of age under 14
I have seen alot of people including a 5 years old sister of my friend having a profile of age over 50.
Great Idea! I never think of this kind of education to be applied to Wikipedia.
Recently I had also getting tired of my computing projects that taught me nothing other than blindly following assignment requirements. The marking scheme makes students only try to make a program works and throw the program away after project submission. It would be great if universities can assign students to improve some open source projects too. Anyway the only difference I found in computing assignments from essay assignments is that almost no one had even attempt to copy code from any open source project just because either they are too lazy to read code or the assignment is too easy.
However I can foresee that if this kind of assignment becomes popular the assignment might become too hard for students. Because Wikipedia is open, a student not only needs to compete with other students in the same university, but also students from other universities and any other people around the world. The quality of Wikipedia will also be improved until so good that its very hard to make any major edit without significant knowledge. Wikipedia may haven't reach this stage, but it will.
Hence I can think of 2 ways to make it an easier assignment: one is to edit some other wiki such as LinuxMM. Or the university may start its own Wiki/Open Source project to reduct competition from the outside world. Of course the latter idea is not that good compared with the original idea, but when we reach some stage this might be the alternative way that is at least better than current system.
You missed one important point: I don't care about wheter my fancy profile can be imported or exported easily from somewhere else, but I need my social network to be available in any other website that I visit. Here is my explanation by example:
Alright, I have a facebook account, and I have tons of friends, and now I come to Slashdot or some other site. I want to find out which of my friends are user of Slashdot too and I want to be able to add them into my social network in Slashdot, I want Slashdot's People modifier to work as it should without doing lots of work. I want to able to manage my network not only from Facebook but also from Slashdot, I want to find new friends through friends of friends or connection graph inside Slashdot, I want to add those friends in Slashdot and update the connection automatically to Facebook too.
I have a blog on Blogger, but I don't want to import my social network into my Google account. I want to let only my friends to post comment to my blog, but my friends don't have Google account or don't want to create or import his/her social network to Google. I want Blogger to be able to verify some anonymous to be actually my friends before allowing to post comment.
I have a Friendster account and I like Friendster more. I have some friends who only use Friendster and some friends who only use Facebook. I want my network to be synchronized within these 2 social network manager, and when I visit other site like Slashdot, I want to be able to import the 2 or more networks automatically.
I have a group of high school friends in Facebook and our group decides to create a new website. The group is well managed and controlled by ensuring everyone in the group know each other and are from the same school. Our new website want to be able to allow registration only from this group of people, so we want a verification system from Facebook between our website and our group.
I don't want to let everybody know who is my friend and how I connected to other people. I don't want to put what FOAF file on my website and let any people mine my private network information. I want to keep my social graph private and only available to my friends and sites I use, and I want authentication based on the social network. When I visit other sites like Slashdot, I don't want to tell Slashdot who are all the friends I have, I only want Facebook to find out from Slashdot that which are my friends are also using Slashdot and return the subset of list of friends. Social network should be private and it is very important to not expose it completely to public.
This is what the things that is needed, not what fancy profile or what superpoke application. With the power of a distributed social graph, alot of powerful things can be done. Other than that, privacy is IMPORTANT and should be always kept in mind. For this to work I have an architecture in mind and I think I should write on my blog now to share with you. Nevertheless, your direction is correct and I like this idea, lets do it together and make it a better social web!
The 3 hours video of The Elegant Universe by Brian Greene also explains String Theory pretty well. Although the video is quite old, it was the first video that made me feel so interested and excited about String Theory.
Yes can someone tell me what the hell is about Network Solutions/Verisign? Why do they still allow the kind of 5 days domain tasting even that caused so much problem? Do they earn money themselve anymore than what these domain tasters earn? What is the benifit for them doing these?
I googled through and found that there are so many complains about GoDaddy that people's domain tasted by domain tasters in split of a second after query. How its done is still a myth that everyone just guessing there are spyware in their computer. Could that be the problem in the whois server itself? And hell is there any place that can tell us which registrars are doing these kind evil things behind? Some people recommends SnapNames to back order domains but I had a domain which been tasted by them. And why the hell are all those wangleedomains.com domain pirates still being out there?
Is there any site that has a clear guide about the dark side of domain names? I am the owner of a.net domain and I have received more than 3 emails trying to convince me to buy/backorder the.com domain and some of them are completely scam. I feel that its so god damn tired to try to buy a domain..
500GB is sold at $170, 1TB is sold at $350, will 2TB sold at $700 and 4TB sold at $1400? The capacity has increased, but the price hasn't drop much over the years. Harddisk price is making me bankrupt.
Anyone experience this with Yahoo Mail? Yahoo Mail has blocked any email that contain my website url, even though my website contains no spam at all. (same case as what happened with YouTube.) Yahoo Mail also blocked my other website's mail server that any mail being sent from that mail server goes into spam folder. All these just happened within last week.
The brute force style of filtering spam disappointed me alot as it makes innocent websites completely helpless to communicate with their members who use yahoo mail. Now that all my important messages go into spam folder and spam mails go into my inbox, the effectiveness of Yahoo spam filter becomes 0. (Yes I know I can unblock my website in my own account settings, but how about mails being sent to other people?)
I don't understand why Apple gives up their market for iPhone. It was such a good chance to beat other strong competitors like Nokia. Apple lose some market in US, Apple lose more market outside US, how would that loss be less than the revenue of agreement with AT&T? Or is it Apple don't want to take that risk of losing in competition?
I feel like Apple is becoming nothing different than Microsoft.. Looks like there wouldn't be a better world even if Bill Gates wasn't born..
I love the open minded thinking of these top universities that actually makes Open Education works. It really is a great source of knowledge to people like me who don't have good enough results and don't have enough money to enter a good university.
I live in Malaysia, and I can never stop appreciating how the Internet and Information Technology led to the me today. During high school I bought alot of pirated CDs that contains ebook for computing. Those CD actually costed alot of money but relatively still hundred times cheaper than just one original book. That was how I started to learn programming, and in my region there was no library or even book shops that had these intermediate programming books. Today I rely heavily on bittorrent and other sources to download pirated ebooks from broadband, and I know much more than what has been teaching in my university.
I realise how powerful knowledge is, and how sux the current education is that produces graduates with good results but little knowledge. Why do we have to get a good result to enter a good university? Why do we have to memorize rubbish and attend specialized tution just to get good grade in examination? Why do we have to spend so much money to get a good education? Why can't we learn the thing we want just because we don't get good results? Why do we need to spend so much money to learn what we want?
If it wasn't these ebooks that educated me, I would be just started learning "what is a loop?" as my other friends do in their first year of university, I wouldn't know the philosophy of Open Source, I wouldn't know how much things is out there waiting for me to learn, and I wouldn't know much enough to care of reading in slashdot.
If Open Education really reached the level of Open Source, then anyone can benifit much more than what I benifited. Education DO need to have the same openess as Open Source.
Of course universities is more than just learning stuff, and it's more of an exposure, but we shouldn't limit the opportunity of learning. And there is some courses that can only be learned through university, such as engineering, doctor and language. But for courses like science and computing we do can gain 90% of the knowledge through Open Education.
Seriously data storage is getting more expensive now days. It's not the harddisks that are expensive, but the backup effort for this tremendous amount of data.
Back to my old days where normal harddisk capacity was 5GB and CD was around, data backup was just burning 6~7 CD and it wasn't too hard.
Then DVD came out and harddisk capacity had increased to 80GB. That was about 20 DVDs to perform a full backup, still not too bad.
After that, P2P such as bittorrent started to rule and harddisk capacity grown to 320GB, but DVD still haven't evolved. The only solution for me was to buy another harddisk for backup.
One year ago 500GB harddisk came down to an affordable price, I bought one and my storage is double again.
After one year of waiting the price of 500GB harddisk still haven't drop much, and 1TB harddisk is still struggling to enter consumer market.
There is no even sign of Blue-ray DVD in my country, not to say the burner. Even if Blue-ray came to an affordable price, 40GB is still too little and too slow to backup 1TB of data.
On the other side, DVD has become so popular and flash drive capacity has grown beyond 2GB. In digital photography I just shoot in raw mode and in each event 2GB of photos are eating space of my harddisk insanely. The harddisk videocam has a capacity of 40GB and allow over 50 hours of video recording, but it will be a big pain on where to store the video clips if you fully use the videocam.
The fact is that removable media has grown larger and larger but the harddisks cannot catch up fast enough to compensate their growth. Yes, price/GB has dropped much, but the total price is just growing too much. We need exponential growth in TB harddisks just as it were in GB harddisk.
Currently I have 1.1TB of desktop harddisk, 500GB of full backup harddisk, 160GB of notebook harddisk, and 60GB of portable harddisk. Synchronizing between main storage and portable storage is a pain as I have to choose limited data carefully. Backup is a pain and takes way too long time. The most expensive hardware on my computer is harddisk which cost half of the total cost!
So is there a cheap and easy way to backup 1TB of data other than using harddisk? No. Please, when will a 2TB harddisk come out and kickstart the exponential growth again?
Slashdot Mirror
The point is not of using Google Spreadsheet as a graphics program, rather as an ajax collaborative game to have some fun with your friends in this holiday. I'd expect a better Ajax apps come out just for this.
A: Hello there! I am Elbot, the robot. I'm here to talk to you about God and the world.
Q: Jim and Sue go to the park on Sunday. Billy the dog goes too.
A: Did this Sue ever write a telephone book?
Q: What is the name of the dog?
A: The dog has no name.
Q: What day did they go to the park?
A: Today is October XV in the year 8 A.C. (After Clinton). A Wednesday.
Q: Where did they go?
A: I could tell you where but the global positioning satellite asked me not to. It's part of an elaborate hoax that the machines are playing on you. I hope I haven't said too much....
I have an idea. Instead putting DRM on PAID music, why not put DRM on FREE music?
A customer get to download any DRM enabled music in a website for free, but the DRM only allows the customer to play the music for 10 times. After that, if the customer likes the music, he/she can purchase from the website and get a DRM free music that can be played anywhere. Win-win for both side.
Does anyone think that tape storage is a good choice? I thought it has life expectancies of 50+ years? Sure the tape drive is expensive, but not really if you are trying to preserve 1TB of data.
Yes, I believe this is what drives hard disk business to grow so fast. Hell look at all the huge files hosted in pirate bay, how much terabytes of total pirated content do you think is there? Plus that each torrent has average of few dozens peers, is that total up to how many petabytes/exabytes? Without these pirated torrents there is really no point to get a 1TB hard disk and 10Mbps Internet connection for average users.
To keep it short, in the sense of economics, there is really no lost of profit. Pirated content is just transfering the profit from content provider to the hardware industry.
I'm a Malaysian, and I study in Singapore. I have both Friendster and Facebook account. Last year most of my friends were still in Friendster only, and so did I. This year, most of my friends have accounts on both side.
I would still prefer Friendster than Facebook. The interface in Friendster is so much simpler. When you see one's profile page, it is a page full of description from him/herself. I can see directly what does this person look like, have quick access to his/her photos and list of his/her friends. Much of the space below the profile page is occupied by self description written by that person, and that is the key thing for him/her to reflect what he/she wants other to know about themselves.
Finally, there are testimonials which are similar to the wall in Facebook. Some people's testimonials are full of fancy pictures such as "friends forever", but I'm glad that the pollution in Friendster is not so much compared to Facebook, part of the reason being there is no automatic mechanism to send testimonial to everyone in your friend list. There are some extra things that you may find in a profile page, such as applications add-on, css decoration and media box. But to me they are just clone of Facebook and none of them interest me.
Compare Friendster's profile page to Facebook, what do I see in Facebook? One small picture on the left, few details of personal information, followed by a mini-feed which tells about useless updates. Then a bunch of junks about who is the hottest, games, pets thingy and whatever more you can think of. The wall in Facebook is pretty much hidden, replaced by SuperWalls where all inside are rubbish forwards which spread like virus in one click. In the end what do I know more about this person? Effectively none.
I like the KISS design of the old profile page in Friendster. It has so much less rubbish than in Facebook. A profile page should be a page to let people know more about you, not to let random people play games with each other. I don't care how you guys in US think about Friendster, because I believe that one day Friendster will stand strong and get pass Facebook. Facebook is just a hype and one day it will burst with other social bubbles just as what happened in dot-com boom.
Wow! So you are asking somebody to download your website's home folder and database, look at the password and private information of members, and deliver you dvd that is ready to be restored with rootkit along?
Because jailbroken iPhone runs OS X with its full potential.
Currently there is no better platform out there to write mobile application, not even Linux.
Here are Cubit's project websites:
http://nortd.com/cubit/
http://eyebeam.org/project/cubit
Now the biggest problem of parallelism is actually sharing data, because you share data you need to worry about data corruption and deadlock. So why don't we just don't allow sharing between two processes at all? Yes it might be slower, but it will be alot easier and there is still alot of parallelism can be achieved without sharing data. We know that there are design patterns that don't need to share data, such as the producer/consumer aka pipeline pattern. So why don't we just only use these patterns?
I think we need a parallel programming language that disallow data sharing. It could adopt Actor Oriented Programming, which is a parallel programming methodology with computational entities called actors. The only concern we need to think about is how to pass complex data structures by value to another process and how to minimize data communication. I don't have much experience on Erlang but I think it is a nice programming language to try on.
The advantage of disallowing sharing of data is so that inexperience programmers can write relatively efficient parallel programs without worrying too much about race condition and deadlock etc. Another advantage is that the program you written can be ported onto any number of processors across a network, because if you don't share data there is not much difference whether you will run your program in just one or many computer! I think that having data communication through network protocol is not wasteful, because there are alot of excellent applications do well in parralelism by distributed computing through network. Hence I think the time wasted on data communication between cores in local processors is much less than the time saved on debugging a shared memory parallel program.
I can't really see any advantage of trying to crunch every single algorithms in a program into parallel algorithms, because in that case what is the whole point of multicore processors? Imagine that some day you have a 16-core processor and you are running 16 desktop applications, all of the 16 applications split their procedures into 16 threads and they made full use of your 16-core processor, and each of them finish their tasks in 1 second. What is the net effect then? Is there any more difference than running 16 single threaded applications each on one core? My whole point is that I don't think there is a need to boost performance on an application if the application can finish its task in very short time. Building a few threads in an application to handle different aspect, such as one thread to handle GUI and one to handle processing, that is good enough parallelism in my opinion.
I am currently taking the module of parallel and concurrent programming in my university, and sadly the lecturer only taught us how deadlock and race condition appear and how synchronization techniques such as locks and semaphores work. But the lecturer doesn't teach us anything about how to write a good parallel program, so I'm pretty sure that most of the students that rely on this module cannot write any good parallel program. Anyway please do correct me if I have anything wrong. Thanks.
In classical music, there are some long pieces which last more than 15 minutes. However they are still been divided into several movements and may contain short pauses in between movements.
You can access both public and private feeds using the OpenSocial People data API. Public feeds don't require any authentication, but they are read-only. If you want to view Friends then your client needs to authenticate before requesting private feeds. It can authenticate using either of two approaches: ClientLogin username/password authentication or AuthSub proxy authentication.
How could I authenticate myself into other social websites like Friendster then?
Authentication is one of the most important aspect to make OpenSocial open, I think.
Friendster prohibits user registration of age under 16.
MySpace prohibits user registration of age under 14.
I have seen alot of people including a 5 years old sister of my friend having a profile of age over 50.
Facebook Terms and Conditions prohibits user registration of age under 18 Friendster prohibits user registration of age under 16 MySpace prohibits user registration of age under 14 I have seen alot of people including a 5 years old sister of my friend having a profile of age over 50.
Recently I had also getting tired of my computing projects that taught me nothing other than blindly following assignment requirements. The marking scheme makes students only try to make a program works and throw the program away after project submission. It would be great if universities can assign students to improve some open source projects too. Anyway the only difference I found in computing assignments from essay assignments is that almost no one had even attempt to copy code from any open source project just because either they are too lazy to read code or the assignment is too easy.
However I can foresee that if this kind of assignment becomes popular the assignment might become too hard for students. Because Wikipedia is open, a student not only needs to compete with other students in the same university, but also students from other universities and any other people around the world. The quality of Wikipedia will also be improved until so good that its very hard to make any major edit without significant knowledge. Wikipedia may haven't reach this stage, but it will.
Hence I can think of 2 ways to make it an easier assignment: one is to edit some other wiki such as LinuxMM. Or the university may start its own Wiki/Open Source project to reduct competition from the outside world. Of course the latter idea is not that good compared with the original idea, but when we reach some stage this might be the alternative way that is at least better than current system.
Alright, I have a facebook account, and I have tons of friends, and now I come to Slashdot or some other site. I want to find out which of my friends are user of Slashdot too and I want to be able to add them into my social network in Slashdot, I want Slashdot's People modifier to work as it should without doing lots of work. I want to able to manage my network not only from Facebook but also from Slashdot, I want to find new friends through friends of friends or connection graph inside Slashdot, I want to add those friends in Slashdot and update the connection automatically to Facebook too.
I have a blog on Blogger, but I don't want to import my social network into my Google account. I want to let only my friends to post comment to my blog, but my friends don't have Google account or don't want to create or import his/her social network to Google. I want Blogger to be able to verify some anonymous to be actually my friends before allowing to post comment.
I have a Friendster account and I like Friendster more. I have some friends who only use Friendster and some friends who only use Facebook. I want my network to be synchronized within these 2 social network manager, and when I visit other site like Slashdot, I want to be able to import the 2 or more networks automatically.
I have a group of high school friends in Facebook and our group decides to create a new website. The group is well managed and controlled by ensuring everyone in the group know each other and are from the same school. Our new website want to be able to allow registration only from this group of people, so we want a verification system from Facebook between our website and our group.
I don't want to let everybody know who is my friend and how I connected to other people. I don't want to put what FOAF file on my website and let any people mine my private network information. I want to keep my social graph private and only available to my friends and sites I use, and I want authentication based on the social network. When I visit other sites like Slashdot, I don't want to tell Slashdot who are all the friends I have, I only want Facebook to find out from Slashdot that which are my friends are also using Slashdot and return the subset of list of friends. Social network should be private and it is very important to not expose it completely to public.
This is what the things that is needed, not what fancy profile or what superpoke application. With the power of a distributed social graph, alot of powerful things can be done. Other than that, privacy is IMPORTANT and should be always kept in mind. For this to work I have an architecture in mind and I think I should write on my blog now to share with you. Nevertheless, your direction is correct and I like this idea, lets do it together and make it a better social web!
The 3 hours video of The Elegant Universe by Brian Greene also explains String Theory pretty well. Although the video is quite old, it was the first video that made me feel so interested and excited about String Theory.
I googled through and found that there are so many complains about GoDaddy that people's domain tasted by domain tasters in split of a second after query. How its done is still a myth that everyone just guessing there are spyware in their computer. Could that be the problem in the whois server itself? And hell is there any place that can tell us which registrars are doing these kind evil things behind? Some people recommends SnapNames to back order domains but I had a domain which been tasted by them. And why the hell are all those wangleedomains.com domain pirates still being out there?
Is there any site that has a clear guide about the dark side of domain names? I am the owner of a .net domain and I have received more than 3 emails trying to convince me to buy/backorder the .com domain and some of them are completely scam. I feel that its so god damn tired to try to buy a domain..
500GB is sold at $170, 1TB is sold at $350, will 2TB sold at $700 and 4TB sold at $1400? The capacity has increased, but the price hasn't drop much over the years. Harddisk price is making me bankrupt.
The brute force style of filtering spam disappointed me alot as it makes innocent websites completely helpless to communicate with their members who use yahoo mail. Now that all my important messages go into spam folder and spam mails go into my inbox, the effectiveness of Yahoo spam filter becomes 0. (Yes I know I can unblock my website in my own account settings, but how about mails being sent to other people?)
Yahoo Mail sux and I am switching to GMail.
But we need 20TB at 2011!!
But how about security? Considering hacking through LAN, hacking without leaving any trace, DNS poisoning, packet sniffing, etc etc...
I feel like Apple is becoming nothing different than Microsoft.. Looks like there wouldn't be a better world even if Bill Gates wasn't born..
I live in Malaysia, and I can never stop appreciating how the Internet and Information Technology led to the me today. During high school I bought alot of pirated CDs that contains ebook for computing. Those CD actually costed alot of money but relatively still hundred times cheaper than just one original book. That was how I started to learn programming, and in my region there was no library or even book shops that had these intermediate programming books. Today I rely heavily on bittorrent and other sources to download pirated ebooks from broadband, and I know much more than what has been teaching in my university.
I realise how powerful knowledge is, and how sux the current education is that produces graduates with good results but little knowledge. Why do we have to get a good result to enter a good university? Why do we have to memorize rubbish and attend specialized tution just to get good grade in examination? Why do we have to spend so much money to get a good education? Why can't we learn the thing we want just because we don't get good results? Why do we need to spend so much money to learn what we want?
If it wasn't these ebooks that educated me, I would be just started learning "what is a loop?" as my other friends do in their first year of university, I wouldn't know the philosophy of Open Source, I wouldn't know how much things is out there waiting for me to learn, and I wouldn't know much enough to care of reading in slashdot.
If Open Education really reached the level of Open Source, then anyone can benifit much more than what I benifited. Education DO need to have the same openess as Open Source.
Of course universities is more than just learning stuff, and it's more of an exposure, but we shouldn't limit the opportunity of learning. And there is some courses that can only be learned through university, such as engineering, doctor and language. But for courses like science and computing we do can gain 90% of the knowledge through Open Education.
Back to my old days where normal harddisk capacity was 5GB and CD was around, data backup was just burning 6~7 CD and it wasn't too hard.
Then DVD came out and harddisk capacity had increased to 80GB. That was about 20 DVDs to perform a full backup, still not too bad.
After that, P2P such as bittorrent started to rule and harddisk capacity grown to 320GB, but DVD still haven't evolved. The only solution for me was to buy another harddisk for backup.
One year ago 500GB harddisk came down to an affordable price, I bought one and my storage is double again.
After one year of waiting the price of 500GB harddisk still haven't drop much, and 1TB harddisk is still struggling to enter consumer market. There is no even sign of Blue-ray DVD in my country, not to say the burner. Even if Blue-ray came to an affordable price, 40GB is still too little and too slow to backup 1TB of data.
On the other side, DVD has become so popular and flash drive capacity has grown beyond 2GB. In digital photography I just shoot in raw mode and in each event 2GB of photos are eating space of my harddisk insanely. The harddisk videocam has a capacity of 40GB and allow over 50 hours of video recording, but it will be a big pain on where to store the video clips if you fully use the videocam.
The fact is that removable media has grown larger and larger but the harddisks cannot catch up fast enough to compensate their growth. Yes, price/GB has dropped much, but the total price is just growing too much. We need exponential growth in TB harddisks just as it were in GB harddisk.
Currently I have 1.1TB of desktop harddisk, 500GB of full backup harddisk, 160GB of notebook harddisk, and 60GB of portable harddisk. Synchronizing between main storage and portable storage is a pain as I have to choose limited data carefully. Backup is a pain and takes way too long time. The most expensive hardware on my computer is harddisk which cost half of the total cost!
So is there a cheap and easy way to backup 1TB of data other than using harddisk? No. Please, when will a 2TB harddisk come out and kickstart the exponential growth again?