If you're really curious.. Bank of America has worked for me, perfectly well. They do their thing with cookies and forms.. no scripting that I noticed.
To me, it's a good compromise between the two. I use it when I can.
Commercial projects can use the code; they just have to publish *my* code, and changes to my code, when they use it. Wrapping my code into a library prevents infection of their code.
And, of course, GPL, X, BSD, Artistic, and all sorts of other licensed projects can use it.
Who loses?
Disclosure: My current project is currently GPL, but that's because I borrowed some GPL'd code early on, while I was still learning the Qt, KDE, and Linux APIs. My rewrites for KDE 2 will supercede the GPL code, allowing me to re-license LGPL.
A SLAPP suit is typically one pressed by a government official, like a school board member, or city council, attempting to silence some local activist group, who's too poor to fight, and not widely known enough to rally support.
Etoy, being outside the country, wouldn't be able to use this, because they're not part of the "public" in question.
Ever heard of netrek? http://www.netrek.org might help you if you haven't, or if you've heard the name, but know nothing about it (as I did yesterday).
Here's an open source game, with binary client distribution. Cheating problems get minimized, because they use the awesome power of mathematics to authenticate the clients (the FAQ calls it RSA, so I bet it's based on some public key cryptography).
GPL Quake could do the same thing.
Don't blame open source for the problem; look to open source for the solution!
You must already be paid to administrate BIND servers... otherwise you might not find it so obvious to have to worry about the latest security holes in the service.:-)
No, not everyone has the option of running their own mail servers.
If I give out an email address, I'd like people to be able to send to it all day long, not just for the few hours a day my computer is part of the internet.
Of course, even if the availability problem were solvable, there's still the DNS problem. dhs.org may be available, but how long until it goes the way of ml.org?
The problem is, glibc-2.1 and glibc-2.0 both look the same to ld.so, libc.so.2
Major system horkage can be the result, unless you're very very careful.
A static-linked version, or at least a version dynamically linked to glibc-2.0 (for the adventurous, among those who got royally burned by Red Hat) would be quite helpful.
Matrox has supported 1152x864 for some time (just more of the high-quality of Matrox 2D), but lots of cards seem to support it now.
Due to some weird interactions and Windows insanity on a system I was working on recently, I ended up playing with a Voodoo3 and a Creative Labs TNT2 board. Both specifically mention 1152x864.
I personally find 1152x864 to be the ideal resolution for a 17 inch monitor... especially if you have a monitor that won't do 1280x1024 at over 60Hz.
Did you read my whole post? I said Jabber would make an "excellent compromise". I like Jabber, and have been hopeful about the idea since I first heard about it.
I agree with you; a decentralised solution would be elegant. That's why Jabber is so appealing.
Jabber just doesn't seem likely right now, unless AOL came on board. AOL, being the #1 ISP around, would have a big impact, in that what it chooses not to support, won't get used enough to matter.
Who talked about killing ICQ, or affecting it at all? Just as UPS thrives in competition with the USPS, ICQ, AIM, Yahoo Pager, and the rest would have the opportunity to prove their worth to the users.
AOL's services would clearly survive, due to the huge established user base. (Disclaimer... I've written an AIM client for KDE, so I'm biased)
My idea is for the IETF, NIST, or somebody to write a standard for real-time messaging. Then, the government can set up some central servers, to get the protocol running strongly. People will try it, because it has the government's name behind it.
Of course, it would be an open standard. So, clearly, clients could come out quickly, with strong encryption on the client side. I wouldn't propose something that would throw out privacy.
Maybe you aren't as familiar with libertarianism as you think... Don't believe the straw-man argument, that libertarians hate anything that the government does.
Getting the government to follow the limitations set in the Constitution would mean hacking off 2/3 of the federal government or something. Though, Article 1 does allow for the Congress to pass laws establishing the post office, and to standardise weights and measures.
These aren't "socialist"... communications infrastructure do not make for state control of all industry. Is it socialist when interstate highways are built and maintained? Was it socialist when the arpanet was built, and all the basic standards for email, newsfeeds, and such were written? Was it socialist for the government to start the DNS system?
Besides, even if the system were set up, it wouldn't necessarily have a monopoly. Federal Express and UPS can testify to that.
As a person of libertarian bent; real-time messaging poses a difficult problem.
The natural solution, for a grand public good such as this, is to let the government set the protocol, and run the server. For the US, this wouldn't even be a wild stretch of the constitution; for it's just a natural extension of the Post Office. Except for the inevitable DOS attacks, and the manpower and hardware needed to overcome them, I don't see it as being too expensive, compared to the trillions the government spends every year anyway.
But, the major powers fighting over this (AT&T, AOL, Microsoft, Yahoo, etc) are never going to propose that. They stand to make too much money off of advertising, to settle for something like that. And your average Republican member of Congress isn't going to know enough about computers to see how easy it would be; they're more likely to do nothing than to approve $25 million or whatever to set up the system. And, in turn, this will lead to a push by your average Democratic members of Congress, who on average know just as little about the internet, to force somebody to open up their servers. And, unlike the Cable TV connectivity, it'd be impossible to set up a way for Company A to reimburse Company B; so the Company running the servers would have to either A) incur a loss or B) shut down the system.
If it can be made to work, Jabber would make an excellent compromise. If ISPs ran Jabber servers, interconnecting in the same way an IRC network or SMTP servers work, everyone would benefit, but nobody could get a free ride (as MS, AOL, AT&T are all trying to get on each other).
I got a bunch of immature, hostile replys (fortunately no emails) for taking a strong, but unpopular, position yesterday. Should this posting be just as unpopular, I hope the discussion is a bit more mature, than just calling me a w4r3z d00d or something.
Oh yeah, and this is a US-centric post. International issues make it even trickier...
The purpose isn't to have a large database of users. The purpose...
1)...for AOL is to get as many people subscribing to their service as possible; with ad revenues as a consolation for people who do AIM or ICQ, but don't get suckered into AOL.
2)...for Microsoft is to boost the overall brand strength, and thus gain more corporate sales, through convincing people that Microsoft can provide solutions for any computing need. Picking up ad revenues is a nice backup as well, should government action mess with the core business.
Slashdot Mirror
Hear, Hear! Compare the success of the Seamonkey, with the (apparent) stagnation at the time JWZ quit.
If you're really curious.. Bank of America has worked for me, perfectly well. They do their thing with cookies and forms.. no scripting that I noticed.
Does anyone else thing that's a bad thing to say, when discussing ergonomics?
"You'll get used to it"
Pain is typically a sign that there is something wrong.
To me, it's a good compromise between the two. I use it when I can.
Commercial projects can use the code; they just have to publish *my* code, and changes to my code, when they use it. Wrapping my code into a library prevents infection of their code.
And, of course, GPL, X, BSD, Artistic, and all sorts of other licensed projects can use it.
Who loses?
Disclosure: My current project is currently GPL, but that's because I borrowed some GPL'd code early on, while I was still learning the Qt, KDE, and Linux APIs. My rewrites for KDE 2 will supercede the GPL code, allowing me to re-license LGPL.
Well, gee.. there it is then.
Anyone who supports these things is clearly a pedophile, or someone who aids and abets pedophiles! Therefore, they must be banned!
Isn't that the only argument that beats "the terrorist threat" these days?
It must be frustrating to know that you *can't* get both of your resolutions!
First po... -1 Offtopic
I wish I had some moderation points left, for this post would say (Score:2 Funny) if I had a say.
;-)
Though, I'm sure it would very quickly say (Score:1 Flamebait) not long after... and I'm pretty sure that's also an accurate moderation.
A SLAPP suit is typically one pressed by a government official, like a school board member, or city council, attempting to silence some local activist group, who's too poor to fight, and not widely known enough to rally support.
Etoy, being outside the country, wouldn't be able to use this, because they're not part of the "public" in question.
Closing the source will work, like with real Quake/Q2/etc, eh?
Cheating occurs as long as one factor remains constant: humanity. The rest is damage control.
Ever heard of netrek? http://www.netrek.org might help you if you haven't, or if you've heard the name, but know nothing about it (as I did yesterday).
Here's an open source game, with binary client distribution. Cheating problems get minimized, because they use the awesome power of mathematics to authenticate the clients (the FAQ calls it RSA, so I bet it's based on some public key cryptography).
GPL Quake could do the same thing.
Don't blame open source for the problem; look to open source for the solution!
nearly always a good idea?
:-)
You must already be paid to administrate BIND servers... otherwise you might not find it so obvious to have to worry about the latest security holes in the service.
No, not everyone has the option of running their own mail servers.
If I give out an email address, I'd like people to be able to send to it all day long, not just for the few hours a day my computer is part of the internet.
Of course, even if the availability problem were solvable, there's still the DNS problem. dhs.org may be available, but how long until it goes the way of ml.org?
or they might sue you for using your first name!
(refer to Leonardo story if you don't get the joke)
Have you actually tried that?
The problem is, glibc-2.1 and glibc-2.0 both look the same to ld.so, libc.so.2
Major system horkage can be the result, unless you're very very careful.
A static-linked version, or at least a version dynamically linked to glibc-2.0 (for the adventurous, among those who got royally burned by Red Hat) would be quite helpful.
He doesn't mean what you think he means.
They'll be releasing the interpreted source, that mod makers will use to make their mods.
This is the equivalent source that's already out for Q2.
No game engine stuff to see here... please disperse.
No.. but if you run backwards certain key explosions.. you hear "Q is dead".
Matrox has supported 1152x864 for some time (just more of the high-quality of Matrox 2D), but lots of cards seem to support it now.
Due to some weird interactions and Windows insanity on a system I was working on recently, I ended up playing with a Voodoo3 and a Creative Labs TNT2 board. Both specifically mention 1152x864.
I personally find 1152x864 to be the ideal resolution for a 17 inch monitor... especially if you have a monitor that won't do 1280x1024 at over 60Hz.
1) AOL owns ICQ
2) AOL released specs for AIM clients... no need for reverse engineering.
Did you read my whole post? I said Jabber would make an "excellent compromise". I like Jabber, and have been hopeful about the idea since I first heard about it.
I agree with you; a decentralised solution would be elegant. That's why Jabber is so appealing.
Jabber just doesn't seem likely right now, unless AOL came on board. AOL, being the #1 ISP around, would have a big impact, in that what it chooses not to support, won't get used enough to matter.
People like AOL, and thus they choose it.
Who talked about killing ICQ, or affecting it at all? Just as UPS thrives in competition with the USPS, ICQ, AIM, Yahoo Pager, and the rest would have the opportunity to prove their worth to the users.
AOL's services would clearly survive, due to the huge established user base. (Disclaimer... I've written an AIM client for KDE, so I'm biased)
My idea is for the IETF, NIST, or somebody to write a standard for real-time messaging. Then, the government can set up some central servers, to get the protocol running strongly. People will try it, because it has the government's name behind it.
Of course, it would be an open standard. So, clearly, clients could come out quickly, with strong encryption on the client side. I wouldn't propose something that would throw out privacy.
Maybe you aren't as familiar with libertarianism as you think... Don't believe the straw-man argument, that libertarians hate anything that the government does.
Getting the government to follow the limitations set in the Constitution would mean hacking off 2/3 of the federal government or something. Though, Article 1 does allow for the Congress to pass laws establishing the post office, and to standardise weights and measures.
These aren't "socialist"... communications infrastructure do not make for state control of all industry. Is it socialist when interstate highways are built and maintained? Was it socialist when the arpanet was built, and all the basic standards for email, newsfeeds, and such were written? Was it socialist for the government to start the DNS system?
Besides, even if the system were set up, it wouldn't necessarily have a monopoly. Federal Express and UPS can testify to that.
With an open standard, it'd be easy to make clients with whatever encryption you want...
You've got that right, though... it'd be another thing for the spooks to track.
As a person of libertarian bent; real-time messaging poses a difficult problem.
The natural solution, for a grand public good such as this, is to let the government set the protocol, and run the server. For the US, this wouldn't even be a wild stretch of the constitution; for it's just a natural extension of the Post Office. Except for the inevitable DOS attacks, and the manpower and hardware needed to overcome them, I don't see it as being too expensive, compared to the trillions the government spends every year anyway.
But, the major powers fighting over this (AT&T, AOL, Microsoft, Yahoo, etc) are never going to propose that. They stand to make too much money off of advertising, to settle for something like that. And your average Republican member of Congress isn't going to know enough about computers to see how easy it would be; they're more likely to do nothing than to approve $25 million or whatever to set up the system. And, in turn, this will lead to a push by your average Democratic members of Congress, who on average know just as little about the internet, to force somebody to open up their servers. And, unlike the Cable TV connectivity, it'd be impossible to set up a way for Company A to reimburse Company B; so the Company running the servers would have to either A) incur a loss or B) shut down the system.
If it can be made to work, Jabber would make an excellent compromise. If ISPs ran Jabber servers, interconnecting in the same way an IRC network or SMTP servers work, everyone would benefit, but nobody could get a free ride (as MS, AOL, AT&T are all trying to get on each other).
I got a bunch of immature, hostile replys (fortunately no emails) for taking a strong, but unpopular, position yesterday. Should this posting be just as unpopular, I hope the discussion is a bit more mature, than just calling me a w4r3z d00d or something.
Oh yeah, and this is a US-centric post. International issues make it even trickier...
The purpose isn't to have a large database of users. The purpose...
...for AOL is to get as many people subscribing to their service as possible; with ad revenues as a consolation for people who do AIM or ICQ, but don't get suckered into AOL.
...for Microsoft is to boost the overall brand strength, and thus gain more corporate sales, through convincing people that Microsoft can provide solutions for any computing need. Picking up ad revenues is a nice backup as well, should government action mess with the core business.
1)
2)