Last time I checked, there has not been any shortage of idiots on this rock.
These days, every kid with dollars in their eyes will download and install the iPhone SDK or whatever they call it and flooding forums for API help and that stuff. Here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/iphone
They all have heard that there are millions to be made on iPhone applications.
The idea is not bad at all, the execution however is a lot real-life version of George Orwell's 1984. Apple probably thinks that if the developers can become rich on applications they develop for Apple's platform, then Apple should get richer too on developers themselves, and I am not just talking cut of the application selling price. They think patenting foreign ideas, yeah generally everything they can conceive that is not outright illegal by law. And if it is, there are always the courts and lawyers hungry for battle.
Forgot some details - it was on chatroulette.com, the dude was seen in profile, from his left side, and after he did the "no-no-no" gesture (the kind the T-1000 did to Sarah Connor in the "Terminator: Judgement Day" film), he simply "nexted" me.
I don't really know the answer to your inquiry, but I had a funny encounter once where I saw a dude in his thirties sitting in an office chair in front of his desk at home, completely naked, and of course masturbating. I then proceeded to show him the middle finger as part of the common gesture, to which he replied with a somewhat to me troubling gest - he extended his left hand (continuing his masturbation session with his right) and did an "no-no-no" with his index finger. I freaked out, partly from his apparent self-control and partly from the absurdity and boldness of this behavior. Had I met, I would probably have punched his face in, but when it was just on camera, I admit it was really freaky. The dude had some balls, pun intended. I am guessing a lot of these people aren't stupid and neither are they victims, many of them may be aggressive, territorial, offensive, brilliant, and what would amount to being "brave", albeit in a very pervert subjective way.
Well, a HTTP proxy anonymizer will not work with a Flash Player client (which is what CR essentially is). This is because of the Flash Media Server streaming service denying connections to any SWF (Flash Player client application file) not originating from a particular domain, most likely the domain the SWF is intended to be hosted at - chatroulette.com.
Simpler put, it will not work at all - you will not find anybody on chatroulette.com if you use a HTTP proxy.
"Want to make a great concave mirror for your telescope? Put a drop of mercury in a bowl and spin the bowl."
I am not sure that's a good piece of advice for an average consumer who wants to build a telescope, which article indeed suggests.
Mercury is highly toxic, toxic enough in quantities of ca 50 ug/m3 (mercury vapour), so if you are going to be spinning mercury for a mirror, now you have been warned. Exposure through inhalation of said vapour and through the eyes, and exposure through skin absorption are all causes for mercury poisoning.
I am fairly sure he confused "codecs" with "decoders". Decorders as in they wrote the video/audio decoding algorithms themselves, as opposed to making use of whatever the environment has.
It's not a PC problem, it's a problem of lacking consistent interfaces to video decoding, and/or lack of their (interfaces') implementations. Solving the "PC problem" by say switching to the homogenous Mac culture, is just working around the "interface" problem by turning yourself in to a dictator in control of both the single interface and its single implementations.
Take it from a computer programmer, to whom most of the problems can be simply deduced to "interface and implementation" problems. Of course, adding the human element to it changes everything, but it is better to start solving a problem on a sort of democratic ground - admitting there are numerous groups wanting to implement an interface, and that each group wanting to make use of an implementation only wants to do it once - through a well-published interface. That's a good start towards a solution.
The trouble with Slashdot is that one has to use half of ones brain capacity to filter sarcasm, irony and other well-cloaked references to information completely unrelated to the discussion, leaving another half to useful application.
I am on Linux, and I much resent Adobe, but they have a point with Linux not having a standard interface to decode H.264. Actually, Linux does not have an interface to decode video at all, it's all a bunch of libraries/command-line-invoked-decoder-backend-daemons, as usual with Linux. A jungle of choices, implications and consequences. Truly, why should Adobe code for up to 5 different interfaces to make use of this? Just good old code bloat then. And they certainly do not want to distribute a version of Flash Player for each of the interfaces.
For all things Linux does right, there should be a library called libvideointerface or something, that delegates all decoding to whatever the host is able to do, and decouples applications from doing the hard work of locating and wrapping functionality.
I cannot do a car analogy here, but a C++ analogy would be:
Not if you invite millions, through an automated revolving door, and nobody even knows you personally OR even your cell phone number, there is no way to contact you at all, in fact. That's more like it.
I disagree. Everything worth having around is mirrored, copied, re-hosted, archived etc. on Internet. 100$ a year is not much for some 20 small projects (or 5 bigger ones or so) by yourself AND by your friends - i.e. 5 dollars a year a person, prepayed as 50$ for 10 years (maybe with discount) - that's not much at all. Heck, people keep local repositories, so even if hosting goes down, all that is needed is another volunteer to put it back up somewhere. Then again, there is the wayback machine - if you plan for your code as text files, wayback machine stores these.
Anyway, I guess I can settle for the following argument: I am not against centralised services per-se (many clients, one server), i just am trying to paint a picture where a big vendor simple is unable to cope with the human traffic. I chose to state it like this, because ironically as it is easy for Google to cope with the data traffic, the human element fails much sooner.
Google does not owe you anything. When will people realize that? You outsource everything to Google, then complain when they lock you out. This is why one should avoid services like Googles, and it will be worse when they will try to convince you you should use some Web 2.0 computer operating system. In fact, this has nothing to do with computers - if you sleep, drink, eat and work at somebody elses property, don't expect to feel like home. It's sort of surprising (or maybe not!) to even encounter such questions on Slashdot - you actually expect everything to work fine, when you are but a mere invisible client to a benemoth that Google has become. If you want to be smart, rent your own domain name and website for 100$ a year, spend a week coding it (obviously if you can do PyChess, you should be able to do some PHP and databases), and tap yourself on your shoulder - you have just achieved independence from Google, and are now part of a distributed Internet model, instead of the ugly, error-prone, monopolized client-server system, where even contacting support is a reason for headache. Now, c'mon - WHAT DID YOU EXPECT? Google has millions of users, they have bold ambitions, but you cannot server the entire planet EFFICIENTLY with one corporation, no matter how large (bureaucracy takes over), you just can't. This was ought to happen, either to you or somebody else, and it will happen again, make no mistake about it.
Slashdot Mirror
Write the software for a programmable dildo, and test it on yourself. It will stimulate you all the way to release :-)
...near "web-based" and "private" being used in one and the same sentence :-)
Last time I checked, there has not been any shortage of idiots on this rock.
These days, every kid with dollars in their eyes will download and install the iPhone SDK or whatever they call it and flooding forums for API help and that stuff. Here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/iphone
They all have heard that there are millions to be made on iPhone applications.
The idea is not bad at all, the execution however is a lot real-life version of George Orwell's 1984.
Apple probably thinks that if the developers can become rich on applications they develop for Apple's platform, then Apple should get richer too on developers themselves, and I am not just talking cut of the application selling price. They think patenting foreign ideas, yeah generally everything they can conceive that is not outright illegal by law. And if it is, there are always the courts and lawyers hungry for battle.
Fail. You can't make a verb out of it.
What the hell is an FP?
If you assume that the story is true, then yes that would appear so. But it doesn't have to be true...
Forgot some details - it was on chatroulette.com, the dude was seen in profile, from his left side, and after he did the "no-no-no" gesture (the kind the T-1000 did to Sarah Connor in the "Terminator: Judgement Day" film), he simply "nexted" me.
I don't really know the answer to your inquiry, but I had a funny encounter once where I saw a dude in his thirties sitting in an office chair in front of his desk at home, completely naked, and of course masturbating. I then proceeded to show him the middle finger as part of the common gesture, to which he replied with a somewhat to me troubling gest - he extended his left hand (continuing his masturbation session with his right) and did an "no-no-no" with his index finger. I freaked out, partly from his apparent self-control and partly from the absurdity and boldness of this behavior. Had I met, I would probably have punched his face in, but when it was just on camera, I admit it was really freaky. The dude had some balls, pun intended. I am guessing a lot of these people aren't stupid and neither are they victims, many of them may be aggressive, territorial, offensive, brilliant, and what would amount to being "brave", albeit in a very pervert subjective way.
Flash Player initially shows a small (and ugly) dialog telling you that if you allow it to use your camera or microphone, you may be recorded.
Well, a HTTP proxy anonymizer will not work with a Flash Player client (which is what CR essentially is). This is because of the Flash Media Server streaming service denying connections to any SWF (Flash Player client application file) not originating from a particular domain, most likely the domain the SWF is intended to be hosted at - chatroulette.com.
Simpler put, it will not work at all - you will not find anybody on chatroulette.com if you use a HTTP proxy.
SOCKS proxies will work however.
Not much to say here, except that it was a wonderful article to read!
It appears we have grossly underestimated these Fremen, My Lord Baron...
"Want to make a great concave mirror for your telescope? Put a drop of mercury in a bowl and spin the bowl."
I am not sure that's a good piece of advice for an average consumer who wants to build a telescope, which article indeed suggests.
Mercury is highly toxic, toxic enough in quantities of ca 50 ug/m3 (mercury vapour), so if you are going to be spinning mercury for a mirror, now you have been warned. Exposure through inhalation of said vapour and through the eyes, and exposure through skin absorption are all causes for mercury poisoning.
I am fairly sure he confused "codecs" with "decoders". Decorders as in they wrote the video/audio decoding algorithms themselves, as opposed to making use of whatever the environment has.
It's not a PC problem, it's a problem of lacking consistent interfaces to video decoding, and/or lack of their (interfaces') implementations. Solving the "PC problem" by say switching to the homogenous Mac culture, is just working around the "interface" problem by turning yourself in to a dictator in control of both the single interface and its single implementations.
Take it from a computer programmer, to whom most of the problems can be simply deduced to "interface and implementation" problems. Of course, adding the human element to it changes everything, but it is better to start solving a problem on a sort of democratic ground - admitting there are numerous groups wanting to implement an interface, and that each group wanting to make use of an implementation only wants to do it once - through a well-published interface. That's a good start towards a solution.
The trouble with Slashdot is that one has to use half of ones brain capacity to filter sarcasm, irony and other well-cloaked references to information completely unrelated to the discussion, leaving another half to useful application.
I am on Linux, and I much resent Adobe, but they have a point with Linux not having a standard interface to decode H.264. Actually, Linux does not have an interface to decode video at all, it's all a bunch of libraries/command-line-invoked-decoder-backend-daemons, as usual with Linux. A jungle of choices, implications and consequences. Truly, why should Adobe code for up to 5 different interfaces to make use of this? Just good old code bloat then. And they certainly do not want to distribute a version of Flash Player for each of the interfaces.
For all things Linux does right, there should be a library called libvideointerface or something, that delegates all decoding to whatever the host is able to do, and decouples applications from doing the hard work of locating and wrapping functionality.
I cannot do a car analogy here, but a C++ analogy would be:
class IVideoDecoder
{
void decode() = 0;
}
We hereby appoint you to convince the 95% of Windows 7 users to do exactly that.
All versions of Windows 7 are affected. Wake up and smell it.
http://www.pretentiousname.com/misc/win7_uac_whitelist2.html
As far as I know, that is not possible. Please provide examples of doing exactly that, thank you.
Not if you invite millions, through an automated revolving door, and nobody even knows you personally OR even your cell phone number, there is no way to contact you at all, in fact. That's more like it.
I disagree. Everything worth having around is mirrored, copied, re-hosted, archived etc. on Internet. 100$ a year is not much for some 20 small projects (or 5 bigger ones or so) by yourself AND by your friends - i.e. 5 dollars a year a person, prepayed as 50$ for 10 years (maybe with discount) - that's not much at all. Heck, people keep local repositories, so even if hosting goes down, all that is needed is another volunteer to put it back up somewhere. Then again, there is the wayback machine - if you plan for your code as text files, wayback machine stores these.
Anyway, I guess I can settle for the following argument: I am not against centralised services per-se (many clients, one server), i just am trying to paint a picture where a big vendor simple is unable to cope with the human traffic. I chose to state it like this, because ironically as it is easy for Google to cope with the data traffic, the human element fails much sooner.
Google does not owe you anything. When will people realize that? You outsource everything to Google, then complain when they lock you out. This is why one should avoid services like Googles, and it will be worse when they will try to convince you you should use some Web 2.0 computer operating system. In fact, this has nothing to do with computers - if you sleep, drink, eat and work at somebody elses property, don't expect to feel like home. It's sort of surprising (or maybe not!) to even encounter such questions on Slashdot - you actually expect everything to work fine, when you are but a mere invisible client to a benemoth that Google has become. If you want to be smart, rent your own domain name and website for 100$ a year, spend a week coding it (obviously if you can do PyChess, you should be able to do some PHP and databases), and tap yourself on your shoulder - you have just achieved independence from Google, and are now part of a distributed Internet model, instead of the ugly, error-prone, monopolized client-server system, where even contacting support is a reason for headache. Now, c'mon - WHAT DID YOU EXPECT? Google has millions of users, they have bold ambitions, but you cannot server the entire planet EFFICIENTLY with one corporation, no matter how large (bureaucracy takes over), you just can't. This was ought to happen, either to you or somebody else, and it will happen again, make no mistake about it.
The Sun has better and more important things to do than to adhere to our primitive line of thought.
The following analogy comes to mind:
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/the_search.png