You think that because you don't understand what principles are .
Irrespective of piracy, the exchange of consideration (paying for the shit) and the receipt of physical product (the fucking dvd) should allow one peaceful enjoyment reasonably expected under the spirit of copyright (those fancy legal entitlements).
I did my part paying for the DVD, and my family owns quite a large number. When Big Media sits there and thinks they can dictate how I enjoy my newly acquired legal rights to enjoy the DVD (the legal agreement between me and Big Media constructed by copyright laws), they have gone too far and become unreasonable.
They have no rational, ethical, or legal position to force me to enjoy the content in any way. That means I can media shift it, apply all the weird filters I want, and even watch the chapters out of order. It especially means I am not forced to watch any extraneous content they may have added.
When they figure out they can't actually control me and I might not act the way they want to (sit through all the bullshit before they want to play the fucking movie), they become abhorrent assholes by creating something called Prohibited User Operations. Really? Prohibit what mother fuckers? You mean I can pay $10 for the DVD and still have prohibitions which is completely contrary to the idea of peaceful enjoyment of one's property?
Now when they realize that I can bypass it and start creating laws like the DMCA and suing people in their delusional states they become enemies of the People.
So.... yeah.... I can bitch and moan about shit like this and base my discontent entirely on principles and not the fact I am inconvenienced by 20 additional seconds. It's the principles involved.
If you can't understand that, then move to someplace like Afghanistan or Pakistan for awhile, because Americans have bitched, moaned, and bled for principles in this country since it was founded.
Afghanistan will be an easy fit for you. "Sheesh.. what's with all these rude, impatient, self important jerks complaining about the Taliban forcing us to have beards? I mean all it takes is sitting back and doing nothing! How easy was that?"
I tend to store the ISOs of my DVD movies and I was surprised to find out that the WD Live TV Plus allows you to skip everything simply by pressing the option button and choosing the root menu. WD is not even paying attention to the PUOs.
I have stored a huge number of DVD movies in my family's library by ripping it to an ISO with the PUO's removed. If you are so inclined, you can even remove the trailers from the movie to save space.
Although since I won't support BluRay I do download BluRay pirate rips of some movies I already own that I really like. Being forced to pay for some extra pixels is just another way they rip you off.
Well I am the CTO. So my opinion is all that really matters.
Of course instead of brow beating everybody into submission I tend to offer paths of least resistance. Just about every employee has a smartphone, and some have tablets. The management especially has tablets and usually the douchy iPads which they are under the assumption can be used for business.
I set up any employee with the public wifi for everything they have. That usually ends the arguments right there since they got what they wanted and I got them not doing it on corporate hardware. As for YouTube on a personal basis, that does allows everyone to do whatever they want since they are using their own phones to share video. Quite a number have tablets ranging from inexpensive Nooks and Kindles all the way up to iPad3's and Transformer Primes and are quite satisfied with YouTube and Netflix on them.
YouTube, as a business consideration, is totally different. A select few have access to YouTube, Facebook, or Twitter to manage any content.
As for the owner and CEO, I don't have any problems once I explain my reasoning, and most importantly, the alternative to allow people some freedom, flexibility and privacy.
1) Americans is always capitalized. 2) Congress Critters are not Americans, at least not in spirit or action. 3) I take that as a compliment. Taking action and creating laws to protect somebody's privacy is always a good thing. Neither governments or corporations should have access to private information that has nothing to do with job, not performed while on the job, or performed on equipment or services not provided for by the corporation.
Security and background checks for some jobs might require a little more... but how many Americans actually work in jobs that are that regulated and require security clearances? Not that many.
This is why I am a staunch advocate of giving separate Internet access at work for employees and having a very well spelled out policy that nothing personal is ever performed on corporate equipment, ever. Nothing corporate ever makes it to personal equipment either. Violation can result in punitive actions all the way up to dismissal. When they are on break and in the break room, feel free to use their smartphones or tablets connected up to the public wi-fi and do whatever they want.
Strict segregation works perfectly fine and is only a problem for the new "hip" techies that have an idealistic vision of bring-your-own-equipment. Which all that really translates to is your company is too fucking cheap to purchase the required hardware and they let their idealism allow all the users to get abused by management that only sees reduced costs. That's my opinion at least, feel free to flame and mod away.
Especially in this case. $10 is not a tremendous amount of money. I downloaded a cam a few months ago to see the quality and it was hysterical. Anybody that downloads a cam and watches it the whole way through is the same kind of person who would dumpster dive and consider it no different than gourmet food.
They would have never paid for it under any circumstances.
While I understand that may be a sensitive issue for those of you in Europe, I still find hate laws intensely stupid and counterproductive.
Censorship and limits on Free Speech are never going to be as productive as they sound, even when well intentioned.
Why do you need hate laws? There are existing laws already which cover those offences. Distinguishing between the two makes the victim a victim twice. I just don't believe in giving special consideration based on race, gender, beliefs, sexual orientation, etc.
As for speech, I don't ever think speech should be punished. It's words, not a weapon.
Like I said, I know it may be a sensitive issue and I understand your position. I just can't agree with it on principle.
Oh I don't know about that. A society with no regulations at all will fail just as quick as an overly regulated society. Are we striking a fair balance? Probably not.
Sure, there is some really stupid shit like hate crime laws, and cyber bullying laws to prevent hurt feelings on the intarwebs. However, there is also some pretty smart stuff like food and safety regulations (most of it) and putting on your farking seat belt and wearing a helmet.
Credit reporting agencies are mandated to give you all of your information. You can also access your entire medical record. That sounds pretty reasonable right? You would think you would not need a law for it... but apparently you do otherwise companies would deny you information because it creates an avenue for unjust profit.
An open standard might be going a little far because of how vague that might be, but it could as easily just be plain text. I don't think it is unreasonable to require a company to disclose upon request all information they have stored about you.
It might get problematic in separating any data that relates to trade secrets, proprietary processes, and 3rd party interactions, but I think it is sound in spirit.
In this case it sounds like the idea is not so different than number portability laws for telecoms. Perhaps the author wants people to have a legal entitlement to access and migrate any data held by one company to another? That's no so unreasonable is it?
The only way around it that I can see is that Facebook would have to outright claim copyright for all submissions, which might not go over well.
That's at the bottom of Slashdot. Even though I own the comments, I cannot peruse or download all of my posts that Slashdot may have stored. It would be pretty nice to have that, and if Slashdot cannot be moved to provide it, a regulation to motivate that sounds good to me.
After all, the basic spirit of the idea is that you are provided free access to anything you own, and that includes any data collected about you... not such a bad idea to pushing forward as a basic legal entitlement in the early years of our Digital Age, IMO.
The biggest problem is not really from Google. I sincerely don't like Google having any information about me (even inferred or ghost), or trying to profit from my information, but I don't think they are truly evil and trying to hurt me.
However, what about the people that can access Google? Say like the Government and law enforcement?
It's just Game Theory being applied to networks and privacy. With such powerful actors like Government and law enforcement it is just insanely dangerous to have that much information be in the possession of a single actor, Google.
That's why I am adamantly opposed to all forms of Social Networking that are not P2P, decentralized, and managed with individually encrypted relationships. So obviously I view Google, Facebook, and Twitter as the three greatest dangers to our continued freedom and privacy at the moment precisely because of attempts by governments to use that information from the most benign purpose (censorship) to the most nefarious purposes (black bagging and death).
Sure, I might be paranoid, but that does not make any less dangerous according to common sense or something more scientific.... like Game Theory.
I think the bigger problem is the hypoxia and the cost.
I'm not opposed to be planning for the future, but we can't bankrupt ourselves doing it like North Korea. Build a cheaper plane and figure out how to keep the pilots from fucking suffocating.
Quite franky, if it takes 350 million to push out a single aircraft then it is unsustainable. If it cost 10 million a piece for single family houses we would still be living in caves and huts.
Instead of the constant boondoggles and Military Industrial Complex bailouts let's figure out a plane that will give us air superiority in either tech or numbers for less than 50 million a plane.
Is that really that unreasonable?
Ohhhh, and the ability to breathe too while we are at. For those pussy pilots who need oxygen.
O and while you're at it, please watch your language, even if you apparently think that a good debate cannot be held without throwing around insults.
Language is just fucking language. When you attack somebody's honor via work morale and ethics, that is far worse, and, "thems fighting words".
We can have a technical disagreement, but you went way too far insulting me, and many others, with work morale and especially ethics. Really? Ethics? You act like anybody that supports the use of Javascript at all is damaging the very fabric of society. Try toning it down a little.
I'm not spoiling anything, which is more of your antagonistic BS. multipart/x-mixed-replace is not universally supported, or so I have always heard. CGI is a nightmare too and my most intensely disliked language. When I have to come up with a solution I need to consider quite a number of things and cross-platform support, and especially support for all browsers is one of them.
I use Javascript where appropriate, and even then, I lean it out and do my damnedest to make the best of the situation. Simple pages don't require Javascript. Public pages on a web portal to a SaaS service don't absolutely require it and I do ask to have the absolute minimum possible to decrease load time and increase compatibility. However, once inside the site the fact remains, which you acknowledge, that Javascript is still required to get quite a bit done.
We can desire good coding practices and security, but fighting the paradigm of client side processing is just futile.
I think that is way overblown. Infrastructure may breakdown, but that does not mean someone's humanity will be erased instantly. Mine won't. I won't hunt, steal, and murder other people.
If I meet another survivalist on the way I think it is rash to assume they are going to kill me for my stuff like somebody from Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome.
More likely it will be a peaceful interaction. Think about the Wild West. Did everybody that crossed everybody's path back then try to kill and steal from each other?
True. How many are going to be heading towards the specific area of the Four Corners that I have in mind? The U.S is a pretty damn big place, and Alaska is one huge chunk of barely hospitable.
I figure out that many survivalists, even if fifty thousand make their way into that area of the country you should have a pretty good amount of breathing room. The U.S has nearly 10 millon square kilometers of space after all, and the Four Corners specifically is ~65,000 square kilometers. Not every survivalist might want to go as deep as me either.
Sure, I might run into one or two people out there but I am not afraid of one or two survivalists. What threat do they really represent to me?
I was being completely sarcastic..... a filter/censorship/oppression system like this has nothing to do with porn. That's just the left hand going "look at me! look at me!" why the right hand is delivering the knife to your balls.
What if they are creating a separate opt-in Naughty-Net where all the porn is collected and categorized into one place by who it might offend the most? That's sounds service oriented to me.....
Yeah..... if it is not the government that comes and black bags you for dissent, it will be the criminals that come break down your door or steal everything you have of value by using those same systems.
If anything, the government has demonstrated that is hugely capable of securing their own systems.
Just to ask a question, do you have the same issue with telephone wiretaps that are done by court order?......... I'm talking about due process wiretaps.
I have absolutely not one problem with due process anything. That means that an FBI agent calls me up at my desk and asks for my assistance in getting information on Joe Criminal. As long as he can fax me (I doubt they are advanced enough for email) something I can verify through independent channels that shows he is law enforcement and the Judicial Branch (due process) approved it, I have no problems complying with such requests.
In the past, other companies did not have problems complying with such requests either. It was the FBI that had a problem with all the work required to do it (and sticking to the rules), and according to many statements, is why they were at war with the phone companies a few decades back. You can take it with a grain of salt, but many old Phreakers like to claim that security went to hell after the break up and that is when the Golden Age of Phreaking began.
Automated Due Process is an oxymoron and a recipe for disaster. There MUST be human interaction when evaluating, approving, and acting upon a legal warrant.
Since it has been demonstrated conclusively that the FBI, and law enforcement in general, wants an automated system that is honor based I simply cannot cooperate as a patriotic American.
It is too dangerous to Freedom, Liberty, Privacy, and Anonymity. When it comes to the ability for the populace to defend itself against a tyrannical regime you will find that a loaded weapon, anonymity, and private communications will be absolutely essential to mount any resistance.
They don't want me paying a department to field their warrant service requests? Fine. I will make sure they can have their automated entry and access to individual communications at will. At the same time I will make sure to devise a system, without compromising features and functions, that will allow the endpoints to control the encryption and make me a simple common carrier.
The problem with expatriation is there is almost literally no place to go that is not following in the foot steps of the progressively "hellishly oppressive states".
It's a like a friend of mine who is much older and believes we have a few years left till a worldwide collapse that will affect even the most basic functions of society. He says he will be going to a tropical island paradise....
Ummmm kay. What about the other 2 million old perverts who follow you? Me? I'll be going to middle of the most hostile parts of the planet that I can find with the most technology and resources that I can bring. Middle of Alaska, or the Four Corners. Someplace that is so ridiculously difficult to get to, that once you get there and can be self sufficient it practically guarantees that 2 million old perverts will not be following you, but maybe, maybe, less than a thousand die hard survivalists. I think the Four Corners has enough room for that.
So while expatriation sounds good, bloody, bloody revolution where you drag all the politicians and the senior FBI members out into the street, along with the 1% and Wall Street, and behead them French Revolution style will be more practical.
If anything, history demonstrates that is a repeating pattern. Like forest fires cleaning out the built up underbrush. Once in awhile, those that have attained power get fat, lazy, and forget about the "line" that can't be crossed. One day they look around and find themselves surrounded by pitchforks and torches and go, "Oh shit. We went too far dammit."
FUCK THEM. If we leave the US, another country will just start up with the same bullshit under the pretense they are providing security.
I will not code back doors into my system just so the FBI can watch me, and my clients, and their customers. If anything, it is forcing me and others to consider how we can become a "common carrier" for media. Plenty of data backup and data retention companies are embracing the paradigm of data being encrypted on the customer's premise and then stored redundantly in data centers. FBI demands a copy of my data from them? Go ahead. When you want the keys to decrypt it go to the customer and ask them.
It is an absolute violation of our privacy. I don't care if historically it had been easy to eavesdrop on citizens and alleged criminals because there was no security. Put bugs in their houses and actually do some footwork.
That is the problem. They have demonstrated beyond any doubt that they cannot be trusted with the power we have given them. Any doubt whatsoever.
They want backdoors? Fine. I'll give them a fucking front door and make it abundantly clear that I don't control the means of encryption. Customers do.
ZRTP, or endpoint-to-endpoint encryption will be the future of communications. Only in very specific applications do you need servers in the media path, and even then, you don't necessarily need plain audio. You can access functions and features available with out-of-band signalling that does not rely on the more traditional in-band signalling of touch tones in the past.
Those bitches in the FBI can bring it on.
Of course the logical conclusion is that the FBI will say that key escrow is required to provide safety and security to Americans. At that point I say let the bloody revolution begin.
Why, pray tell, does the application need to be hosted anywhere other than the user's computer?
Simple. Easy delivery. Instead of going to a site and then downloading the app, you can go the site and be running the app. It requires a lot of standardization and attention to security, but it can be done with quite a few benefits including a single point to upgrade and cross platform capability.
Document markup languages just are not getting the job done for what we need today. That is real time informational displays and two way interaction.
HTML worked real well when the Internet was nothing more than a *very* basic interactive TV where you navigated content. Once it got more complicated than that you started to need client side processing in a hurry.
Javascript is not perfect or optimal, but we need it, despite adamant claims to the contrary.
It's not actually useful for anything that wouldn't be better done client/server or as a compiled native application
Javascript is client/server though. Sure, it can be used to modify the DOM without ever making a call to the server, like JS games, but most of the time that is not true. It is used to communicate back to the server, download new JS code or retrieve data, and then present it to the user.
Anything can be done better in a compiled native application, but can it be done as fast, with such an easy delivery system, or as cross-platform capable?
Such as? I have never met a site that wasn't improved by turning off javascript, except for those that were deliberately crippled into requiring javascript
Take any site that has real time data being displayed and you require Javascript, unless you want the more heavy and equally security weak Silverlight/Flash. Java can be a solution, but that is difficult and costly to implement compared to JS, Silverlight and Flash.
That doesn't make it a good idea. The internet will continue to regress, and there's nothing I can do about it. That's true, but it's still a regression.
Nooo... It's a wonderful idea. Should have been that way from the start. A nice standardized sandboxed environment where you could download and run cross-platform apps. When I first started to try to get into web "programming" I balked at the idea simply because:
A) WTF?! You mean people can send packets to my computer on completely different networks? That's a recipe for disaster. (turned out to be right) B) Wait a sec... where is the programming? There is no programming. I was expecting programming.
The Internet never regressed man, it started out stuck-on-stupid. That's why we call people web developers and not web programmers. If I had a nickle for every web developer I meet that wants to pick my brain on PHP and Javascript simply because they lack basic programming skills and knowledge I learned decades ago, I would be a millionaire. You want to see the equivalent of a Unicorn? Find a web developer, that did not study CS, has only been in "computers" for a few years, and knows the difference between passing a variable by reference and by value.
If anything, that's why I could pick up PHP so fast. When you come from object oriented stuff in C with polymorphic classes, etc. PHP does not exactly look as hard as Quantum Mechanics right?
It's not regressing, but is actually going to be getting much better. I don't want to be stuck where we are now anymore than you do. What we need is cross-platform capability because neither Apple, Microsoft, or Google is going to win the war and we have been suffering too long because of it.
Slashdot Mirror
You think that because you don't understand what principles are .
Irrespective of piracy, the exchange of consideration (paying for the shit) and the receipt of physical product (the fucking dvd) should allow one peaceful enjoyment reasonably expected under the spirit of copyright (those fancy legal entitlements).
I did my part paying for the DVD, and my family owns quite a large number. When Big Media sits there and thinks they can dictate how I enjoy my newly acquired legal rights to enjoy the DVD (the legal agreement between me and Big Media constructed by copyright laws), they have gone too far and become unreasonable.
They have no rational, ethical, or legal position to force me to enjoy the content in any way. That means I can media shift it, apply all the weird filters I want, and even watch the chapters out of order. It especially means I am not forced to watch any extraneous content they may have added.
When they figure out they can't actually control me and I might not act the way they want to (sit through all the bullshit before they want to play the fucking movie), they become abhorrent assholes by creating something called Prohibited User Operations. Really? Prohibit what mother fuckers? You mean I can pay $10 for the DVD and still have prohibitions which is completely contrary to the idea of peaceful enjoyment of one's property?
Now when they realize that I can bypass it and start creating laws like the DMCA and suing people in their delusional states they become enemies of the People.
So.... yeah.... I can bitch and moan about shit like this and base my discontent entirely on principles and not the fact I am inconvenienced by 20 additional seconds. It's the principles involved.
If you can't understand that, then move to someplace like Afghanistan or Pakistan for awhile, because Americans have bitched, moaned, and bled for principles in this country since it was founded.
Afghanistan will be an easy fit for you. "Sheesh.. what's with all these rude, impatient, self important jerks complaining about the Taliban forcing us to have beards? I mean all it takes is sitting back and doing nothing! How easy was that?"
I tend to store the ISOs of my DVD movies and I was surprised to find out that the WD Live TV Plus allows you to skip everything simply by pressing the option button and choosing the root menu. WD is not even paying attention to the PUOs.
You don't even need to pirate the movie.
I have stored a huge number of DVD movies in my family's library by ripping it to an ISO with the PUO's removed. If you are so inclined, you can even remove the trailers from the movie to save space.
Although since I won't support BluRay I do download BluRay pirate rips of some movies I already own that I really like. Being forced to pay for some extra pixels is just another way they rip you off.
Yeah... because getting upset over principles when it is just easier to settle for less and wait 20 seconds is so much easier.
The more you are willing to settle for shit the more you will find you are eating it more often.
Or.... I could be referring to policy and not direct action.... It's called context. Try it :)
Well I am the CTO. So my opinion is all that really matters.
Of course instead of brow beating everybody into submission I tend to offer paths of least resistance. Just about every employee has a smartphone, and some have tablets. The management especially has tablets and usually the douchy iPads which they are under the assumption can be used for business.
I set up any employee with the public wifi for everything they have. That usually ends the arguments right there since they got what they wanted and I got them not doing it on corporate hardware. As for YouTube on a personal basis, that does allows everyone to do whatever they want since they are using their own phones to share video. Quite a number have tablets ranging from inexpensive Nooks and Kindles all the way up to iPad3's and Transformer Primes and are quite satisfied with YouTube and Netflix on them.
YouTube, as a business consideration, is totally different. A select few have access to YouTube, Facebook, or Twitter to manage any content.
As for the owner and CEO, I don't have any problems once I explain my reasoning, and most importantly, the alternative to allow people some freedom, flexibility and privacy.
They must be.... americans.
1) Americans is always capitalized.
2) Congress Critters are not Americans, at least not in spirit or action.
3) I take that as a compliment. Taking action and creating laws to protect somebody's privacy is always a good thing. Neither governments or corporations should have access to private information that has nothing to do with job, not performed while on the job, or performed on equipment or services not provided for by the corporation.
Security and background checks for some jobs might require a little more... but how many Americans actually work in jobs that are that regulated and require security clearances? Not that many.
This is why I am a staunch advocate of giving separate Internet access at work for employees and having a very well spelled out policy that nothing personal is ever performed on corporate equipment, ever. Nothing corporate ever makes it to personal equipment either. Violation can result in punitive actions all the way up to dismissal. When they are on break and in the break room, feel free to use their smartphones or tablets connected up to the public wi-fi and do whatever they want.
Strict segregation works perfectly fine and is only a problem for the new "hip" techies that have an idealistic vision of bring-your-own-equipment. Which all that really translates to is your company is too fucking cheap to purchase the required hardware and they let their idealism allow all the users to get abused by management that only sees reduced costs. That's my opinion at least, feel free to flame and mod away.
Especially in this case. $10 is not a tremendous amount of money. I downloaded a cam a few months ago to see the quality and it was hysterical. Anybody that downloads a cam and watches it the whole way through is the same kind of person who would dumpster dive and consider it no different than gourmet food.
They would have never paid for it under any circumstances.
While I understand that may be a sensitive issue for those of you in Europe, I still find hate laws intensely stupid and counterproductive.
Censorship and limits on Free Speech are never going to be as productive as they sound, even when well intentioned.
Why do you need hate laws? There are existing laws already which cover those offences. Distinguishing between the two makes the victim a victim twice. I just don't believe in giving special consideration based on race, gender, beliefs, sexual orientation, etc.
As for speech, I don't ever think speech should be punished. It's words, not a weapon.
Like I said, I know it may be a sensitive issue and I understand your position. I just can't agree with it on principle.
Well........ that's one way to look at it :)
Oh I don't know about that. A society with no regulations at all will fail just as quick as an overly regulated society. Are we striking a fair balance? Probably not.
Sure, there is some really stupid shit like hate crime laws, and cyber bullying laws to prevent hurt feelings on the intarwebs. However, there is also some pretty smart stuff like food and safety regulations (most of it) and putting on your farking seat belt and wearing a helmet.
Credit reporting agencies are mandated to give you all of your information. You can also access your entire medical record. That sounds pretty reasonable right? You would think you would not need a law for it... but apparently you do otherwise companies would deny you information because it creates an avenue for unjust profit.
An open standard might be going a little far because of how vague that might be, but it could as easily just be plain text. I don't think it is unreasonable to require a company to disclose upon request all information they have stored about you.
It might get problematic in separating any data that relates to trade secrets, proprietary processes, and 3rd party interactions, but I think it is sound in spirit.
In this case it sounds like the idea is not so different than number portability laws for telecoms. Perhaps the author wants people to have a legal entitlement to access and migrate any data held by one company to another? That's no so unreasonable is it?
The only way around it that I can see is that Facebook would have to outright claim copyright for all submissions, which might not go over well.
Trademarks property of their respective owners. Comments owned by the poster. © 2012 All Rights Reserved. Geeknet, Inc
That's at the bottom of Slashdot. Even though I own the comments, I cannot peruse or download all of my posts that Slashdot may have stored. It would be pretty nice to have that, and if Slashdot cannot be moved to provide it, a regulation to motivate that sounds good to me.
After all, the basic spirit of the idea is that you are provided free access to anything you own, and that includes any data collected about you... not such a bad idea to pushing forward as a basic legal entitlement in the early years of our Digital Age, IMO.
The biggest problem is not really from Google. I sincerely don't like Google having any information about me (even inferred or ghost), or trying to profit from my information, but I don't think they are truly evil and trying to hurt me.
However, what about the people that can access Google? Say like the Government and law enforcement?
It's just Game Theory being applied to networks and privacy. With such powerful actors like Government and law enforcement it is just insanely dangerous to have that much information be in the possession of a single actor, Google.
That's why I am adamantly opposed to all forms of Social Networking that are not P2P, decentralized, and managed with individually encrypted relationships. So obviously I view Google, Facebook, and Twitter as the three greatest dangers to our continued freedom and privacy at the moment precisely because of attempts by governments to use that information from the most benign purpose (censorship) to the most nefarious purposes (black bagging and death).
Sure, I might be paranoid, but that does not make any less dangerous according to common sense or something more scientific.... like Game Theory.
I think the bigger problem is the hypoxia and the cost.
I'm not opposed to be planning for the future, but we can't bankrupt ourselves doing it like North Korea. Build a cheaper plane and figure out how to keep the pilots from fucking suffocating.
Quite franky, if it takes 350 million to push out a single aircraft then it is unsustainable. If it cost 10 million a piece for single family houses we would still be living in caves and huts.
Instead of the constant boondoggles and Military Industrial Complex bailouts let's figure out a plane that will give us air superiority in either tech or numbers for less than 50 million a plane.
Is that really that unreasonable?
Ohhhh, and the ability to breathe too while we are at. For those pussy pilots who need oxygen.
Well at least Android is 4G already........
O and while you're at it, please watch your language, even if you apparently think that a good debate cannot be held without throwing around insults.
Language is just fucking language. When you attack somebody's honor via work morale and ethics, that is far worse, and, "thems fighting words".
We can have a technical disagreement, but you went way too far insulting me, and many others, with work morale and especially ethics. Really? Ethics? You act like anybody that supports the use of Javascript at all is damaging the very fabric of society. Try toning it down a little.
I'm not spoiling anything, which is more of your antagonistic BS. multipart/x-mixed-replace is not universally supported, or so I have always heard. CGI is a nightmare too and my most intensely disliked language. When I have to come up with a solution I need to consider quite a number of things and cross-platform support, and especially support for all browsers is one of them.
I use Javascript where appropriate, and even then, I lean it out and do my damnedest to make the best of the situation. Simple pages don't require Javascript. Public pages on a web portal to a SaaS service don't absolutely require it and I do ask to have the absolute minimum possible to decrease load time and increase compatibility. However, once inside the site the fact remains, which you acknowledge, that Javascript is still required to get quite a bit done.
We can desire good coding practices and security, but fighting the paradigm of client side processing is just futile.
I think that is way overblown. Infrastructure may breakdown, but that does not mean someone's humanity will be erased instantly. Mine won't. I won't hunt, steal, and murder other people.
If I meet another survivalist on the way I think it is rash to assume they are going to kill me for my stuff like somebody from Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome.
More likely it will be a peaceful interaction. Think about the Wild West. Did everybody that crossed everybody's path back then try to kill and steal from each other?
True. How many are going to be heading towards the specific area of the Four Corners that I have in mind? The U.S is a pretty damn big place, and Alaska is one huge chunk of barely hospitable.
I figure out that many survivalists, even if fifty thousand make their way into that area of the country you should have a pretty good amount of breathing room. The U.S has nearly 10 millon square kilometers of space after all, and the Four Corners specifically is ~65,000 square kilometers. Not every survivalist might want to go as deep as me either.
Sure, I might run into one or two people out there but I am not afraid of one or two survivalists. What threat do they really represent to me?
I was being completely sarcastic..... a filter/censorship/oppression system like this has nothing to do with porn. That's just the left hand going "look at me! look at me!" why the right hand is delivering the knife to your balls.
Maybe it's not even prohibition?
What if they are creating a separate opt-in Naughty-Net where all the porn is collected and categorized into one place by who it might offend the most? That's sounds service oriented to me.....
Yeah..... if it is not the government that comes and black bags you for dissent, it will be the criminals that come break down your door or steal everything you have of value by using those same systems.
If anything, the government has demonstrated that is hugely capable of securing their own systems.
Just to ask a question, do you have the same issue with telephone wiretaps that are done by court order?......... I'm talking about due process wiretaps.
I have absolutely not one problem with due process anything. That means that an FBI agent calls me up at my desk and asks for my assistance in getting information on Joe Criminal. As long as he can fax me (I doubt they are advanced enough for email) something I can verify through independent channels that shows he is law enforcement and the Judicial Branch (due process) approved it, I have no problems complying with such requests.
In the past, other companies did not have problems complying with such requests either. It was the FBI that had a problem with all the work required to do it (and sticking to the rules), and according to many statements, is why they were at war with the phone companies a few decades back. You can take it with a grain of salt, but many old Phreakers like to claim that security went to hell after the break up and that is when the Golden Age of Phreaking began.
Automated Due Process is an oxymoron and a recipe for disaster. There MUST be human interaction when evaluating, approving, and acting upon a legal warrant.
Since it has been demonstrated conclusively that the FBI, and law enforcement in general, wants an automated system that is honor based I simply cannot cooperate as a patriotic American.
It is too dangerous to Freedom, Liberty, Privacy, and Anonymity. When it comes to the ability for the populace to defend itself against a tyrannical regime you will find that a loaded weapon, anonymity, and private communications will be absolutely essential to mount any resistance.
They don't want me paying a department to field their warrant service requests? Fine. I will make sure they can have their automated entry and access to individual communications at will. At the same time I will make sure to devise a system, without compromising features and functions, that will allow the endpoints to control the encryption and make me a simple common carrier.
The problem with expatriation is there is almost literally no place to go that is not following in the foot steps of the progressively "hellishly oppressive states".
It's a like a friend of mine who is much older and believes we have a few years left till a worldwide collapse that will affect even the most basic functions of society. He says he will be going to a tropical island paradise....
Ummmm kay. What about the other 2 million old perverts who follow you? Me? I'll be going to middle of the most hostile parts of the planet that I can find with the most technology and resources that I can bring. Middle of Alaska, or the Four Corners. Someplace that is so ridiculously difficult to get to, that once you get there and can be self sufficient it practically guarantees that 2 million old perverts will not be following you, but maybe, maybe, less than a thousand die hard survivalists. I think the Four Corners has enough room for that.
So while expatriation sounds good, bloody, bloody revolution where you drag all the politicians and the senior FBI members out into the street, along with the 1% and Wall Street, and behead them French Revolution style will be more practical.
If anything, history demonstrates that is a repeating pattern. Like forest fires cleaning out the built up underbrush. Once in awhile, those that have attained power get fat, lazy, and forget about the "line" that can't be crossed. One day they look around and find themselves surrounded by pitchforks and torches and go, "Oh shit. We went too far dammit."
Ohh, I fully appreciate what I may be risking.
FUCK THEM. If we leave the US, another country will just start up with the same bullshit under the pretense they are providing security.
I will not code back doors into my system just so the FBI can watch me, and my clients, and their customers. If anything, it is forcing me and others to consider how we can become a "common carrier" for media. Plenty of data backup and data retention companies are embracing the paradigm of data being encrypted on the customer's premise and then stored redundantly in data centers. FBI demands a copy of my data from them? Go ahead. When you want the keys to decrypt it go to the customer and ask them.
It is an absolute violation of our privacy. I don't care if historically it had been easy to eavesdrop on citizens and alleged criminals because there was no security. Put bugs in their houses and actually do some footwork.
That is the problem. They have demonstrated beyond any doubt that they cannot be trusted with the power we have given them. Any doubt whatsoever.
They want backdoors? Fine. I'll give them a fucking front door and make it abundantly clear that I don't control the means of encryption. Customers do.
ZRTP, or endpoint-to-endpoint encryption will be the future of communications. Only in very specific applications do you need servers in the media path, and even then, you don't necessarily need plain audio. You can access functions and features available with out-of-band signalling that does not rely on the more traditional in-band signalling of touch tones in the past.
Those bitches in the FBI can bring it on.
Of course the logical conclusion is that the FBI will say that key escrow is required to provide safety and security to Americans. At that point I say let the bloody revolution begin.
Why, pray tell, does the application need to be hosted anywhere other than the user's computer?
Simple. Easy delivery. Instead of going to a site and then downloading the app, you can go the site and be running the app. It requires a lot of standardization and attention to security, but it can be done with quite a few benefits including a single point to upgrade and cross platform capability.
Document markup languages just are not getting the job done for what we need today. That is real time informational displays and two way interaction.
HTML worked real well when the Internet was nothing more than a *very* basic interactive TV where you navigated content. Once it got more complicated than that you started to need client side processing in a hurry.
Javascript is not perfect or optimal, but we need it, despite adamant claims to the contrary.
None of which we actually need to do
That's a HUGE generalization.
It's not actually useful for anything that wouldn't be better done client/server or as a compiled native application
Javascript is client/server though. Sure, it can be used to modify the DOM without ever making a call to the server, like JS games, but most of the time that is not true. It is used to communicate back to the server, download new JS code or retrieve data, and then present it to the user.
Anything can be done better in a compiled native application, but can it be done as fast, with such an easy delivery system, or as cross-platform capable?
Such as? I have never met a site that wasn't improved by turning off javascript, except for those that were deliberately crippled into requiring javascript
Take any site that has real time data being displayed and you require Javascript, unless you want the more heavy and equally security weak Silverlight/Flash. Java can be a solution, but that is difficult and costly to implement compared to JS, Silverlight and Flash.
That doesn't make it a good idea. The internet will continue to regress, and there's nothing I can do about it. That's true, but it's still a regression.
Nooo... It's a wonderful idea. Should have been that way from the start. A nice standardized sandboxed environment where you could download and run cross-platform apps. When I first started to try to get into web "programming" I balked at the idea simply because:
A) WTF?! You mean people can send packets to my computer on completely different networks? That's a recipe for disaster. (turned out to be right)
B) Wait a sec... where is the programming? There is no programming. I was expecting programming.
The Internet never regressed man, it started out stuck-on-stupid. That's why we call people web developers and not web programmers. If I had a nickle for every web developer I meet that wants to pick my brain on PHP and Javascript simply because they lack basic programming skills and knowledge I learned decades ago, I would be a millionaire. You want to see the equivalent of a Unicorn? Find a web developer, that did not study CS, has only been in "computers" for a few years, and knows the difference between passing a variable by reference and by value.
If anything, that's why I could pick up PHP so fast. When you come from object oriented stuff in C with polymorphic classes, etc. PHP does not exactly look as hard as Quantum Mechanics right?
It's not regressing, but is actually going to be getting much better. I don't want to be stuck where we are now anymore than you do. What we need is cross-platform capability because neither Apple, Microsoft, or Google is going to win the war and we have been suffering too long because of it.