This move will probably kill a few startups, or at least force them to alter their strategy. There are a few out there who were trying to allow users monetize their private information in some form and give you the opt-in/opt-out ability in a centralized fashion (kind of like the apps settings page in Facebook). They all face the same problem of critical mass for adoption and their problem just got harder. Why would you bother with a www.personal.com (which has a neat app) or anything like that if you're already a google.com account holder in some form (and between gmail, google/android and YouTube, who isn't?) and could get paid in real cash instead of free services. Like the saying goes, If you're not paying for it, the product they're selling is you.
It'll be interesting to see what the next step is in this. What if you could increase your payout by allowing 3rd parties access to your usage profile? Say an advertising agency or consumer research agency? Instead of a virtual wallet it could become your virtual dossier. Link your gym membership and your grocery store loyalty card to your virtual dossier and you have a treasure trove of information that could actually be cashed in on. We currently give that information away for free email or other web services online and for slightly lower shopping prices with the store loyalty cards. This would give you a single entity to deal with who could aggregate and allow you to profit from all of this consumer data. That's the 'hugs and lollipops' vision. The sinister vision (which is probably more likely) is one where companies only target the high profit potential consumers and marginalize everyone else. The have/have-not divide would widen.
I know this ship has basically sailed and the conversation has moved on, but wanted to add my $0.02 to the mix. First off, I'm basically a dilbertonian Pointy-Haired-Boss. I'm also not going to get into the issue that you used your insider knowledge to custom taylor a statement of work to present to me. I have engineers who write stuff in their own time, like you have done. Most of the time it pisses me off. Not because they took the initiative, not because they wrote it in Ruby when we're a java shop, but because it didn't align with my priorities. I'd be angry at myself, because that means I wasn't clear what the priorities are. I'd be angry at the individual because they weren't listening and/or didn't come and ask for clarification if they didn't understand. So my questions to you would be: When your boss gets his ass chewed, is it because his team isn't efficient and streamlined? Has he ever mentioned your team spends too much time on process and workflow and not enough time "their respective punch lists" as you state? Does your tool leverage languages and software packages that you already have in house (care and feeding after your gone)?
For me, unless you're solving a problem that I have stated as a problem or in some way eluded to I'd say, no thanks, you're fired. Of all the holes in the leaking IT Bucket, is the one you plugged the same one your boss would plug?
Why bother mucking with the real source tree? Just make a clone on your mozilla.org-impostor site with an update that has all the appropriate back doors in it.
Just deliver a DNS spoof/change (like dns cache poison, etc) via another exploit, get the browser to self-update (and clean up your previous exploit tracks) and then sit back and wait to spring your trap. The only code change you need to insert at first is to get future updates from the impostor site.
Later on you can 'update' the browser to proxy all $MONEY web traffic through you and your proxy farm. You could even add a new trusted CA to your code base to make it all the more convincing and to cover tracks from the 'imposter-mozilla.org' cert in case it's discovered and revoked.
Funny thing about the 'act' that was passed is it has a clause about congressional review. So at some point, congress could have said "This is stupid" and undone the DST change. Everyone was waiting for the fall session to start, I suspect, to ensure the DST change was going to stick.
Further, if your running Solaris it's not just a TZ patch. There's libc changes:
This isn't about a perpetual motion machine or an entropy reducing device, or even P vs. NP or Riemann's Hypothesis. This is code. This isn't world changing. Bugs happen, then they get fixed
Have you been to your Doctors office lately? Code bugs can be a serious issue with a cost in human lives. The Therac-25 debacle was just one infamous example. Google 10 worst software bugs for some others. Software bugs can have more serious implications than the annoyance of getting pw0ned. In short, yes it can be world changing.
Cheers,
Rich
Great, but per the parent, how does that save me bundles? I can see savings, being able to pile more VM's on the hardware, but just don't see how we get from a few extra VM's to bundles. Perhaps the OP was talking about the costs of VMWare ESX vs Xen.
VMWare's OS awareness of Windows has advantages. Being able to load one copy of a static DLL shared across VM's can save you bundles of physical ram...
I don't see how that tracks. How is the %2 impact going to save me a bundle? Moving to linux suposedly will save me money if I virtualize or not, don't see how it being virtualization friendly improves things. Are you saying I'll spend less in hardware by switching to linux? Migrating to linux isn't free (man-hours wise), so the hardware savings better be pretty damn substantial to offset it.
Right... I can see people lining up in droves to use a website that makes them click, enter, type, fumble for token, clickity click... The users are already stupid enough to fall for a phishing scheme. Now you're going to have them deal with all of that stuff too? You open that bank, and I'll keep the current phishable system and make up for the losses in shear volume of fees I charge to customers who defect from your hard to use system to my easy to use bank. There's a reason grandma and grandpa use windows instead of linux... (yeah yeah, 'but that's changing' and reply with the story of how your 120 year old great grandmother is using debian and customizes her kernel using emacs macros) There's no silver bullet here. It's going to be a combination of small things in both email apps, browser apps, security apps and user education that solves this problem. In the mean time diligence, diligence, diligence.
I think it gets a little more fuzzy than you make it out to be. The Steve was also talking about the 20" iMac, which runs at 2Ghz, not the 1.83Ghz Ars tested. So unless you know that the 1.8Ghz G5 vs 2.0ghz G5 difference is the same as the 1.83Ghz intel vs 2.0Ghz intel, it's difficult to make any claims in absence of facts.
I was 100% in agreement with the parent until you pointed this out. Although I suspect these aren't mutually exclusive. GSA is probably the first step. They get your traffic to their network via anyone's hotspot. Then later on they roll out their own "Google WiFI" hotspots in 'major cities' to cut out some middle men.
Beauty about this aproach to me is they haven't had to lay out much infrastructure to do GSA. Just close proximity peering points with the Bay area hotspot provider networks which can be done relatively cheaply. Get you hooked on GSA with low capital expenditures. Then use the usage stats to find out where they can plunk down Goole WiFi and get an instant large user base. Then bring on the location-based google-adsense....
Anyway, I've taken way to long to put this comment out so I'm sure this has been said a few times, probably better than this on down the comment tree. *Sheesh*... they expect me to do real work here....
Yup.. you hit the nail on the head. They did the same thing with the G4 iMac. They put in less L2 cache in the 'consumer' models. The L2 cache makes a pretty big difference. I couldn't google it, but I remember there being and article where a "digital audio" 533Mhz G4 power mac with 1Mb L2 cache cleaned the clock of a 800Mhz G4 iMac and it's lack of L2 cache when they first came out. Apple's trying to make it worth while to spend the extra cash for the increased speed of the 12" PowerBook. I'd love to see a benchmark between the two to see just now much a difference twice the L2 cache makes.
Just be careful which D-link adapter you have. The product page for the keyboard doesn't spell it out, but when you go to buy it in the online store it says:
"Important: Requires a Bluetooth enabled Macintosh (either built-in or using the qualified D-Link DBT-120 USB Bluetooth Adapter (older D-Link DWB-120M adapters are not supported). Mac OS X, v10.2.6 or higher required. "
So if you've got the DBT-120 and not the DWB-120M you're set.
Slashdot Mirror
The folks at Etsy do it to replicate SOLR:
http://codeascraft.etsy.com/2012/01/23/solr-bittorrent-index-replication/
Not sure if that's what you mean.
This move will probably kill a few startups, or at least force them to alter their strategy. There are a few out there who were trying to allow users monetize their private information in some form and give you the opt-in/opt-out ability in a centralized fashion (kind of like the apps settings page in Facebook). They all face the same problem of critical mass for adoption and their problem just got harder. Why would you bother with a www.personal.com (which has a neat app) or anything like that if you're already a google.com account holder in some form (and between gmail, google/android and YouTube, who isn't?) and could get paid in real cash instead of free services. Like the saying goes, If you're not paying for it, the product they're selling is you.
It'll be interesting to see what the next step is in this. What if you could increase your payout by allowing 3rd parties access to your usage profile? Say an advertising agency or consumer research agency? Instead of a virtual wallet it could become your virtual dossier. Link your gym membership and your grocery store loyalty card to your virtual dossier and you have a treasure trove of information that could actually be cashed in on. We currently give that information away for free email or other web services online and for slightly lower shopping prices with the store loyalty cards. This would give you a single entity to deal with who could aggregate and allow you to profit from all of this consumer data. That's the 'hugs and lollipops' vision. The sinister vision (which is probably more likely) is one where companies only target the high profit potential consumers and marginalize everyone else. The have/have-not divide would widen.
Why am I not asleep again?
I know this ship has basically sailed and the conversation has moved on, but wanted to add my $0.02 to the mix. First off, I'm basically a dilbertonian Pointy-Haired-Boss. I'm also not going to get into the issue that you used your insider knowledge to custom taylor a statement of work to present to me. I have engineers who write stuff in their own time, like you have done. Most of the time it pisses me off. Not because they took the initiative, not because they wrote it in Ruby when we're a java shop, but because it didn't align with my priorities. I'd be angry at myself, because that means I wasn't clear what the priorities are. I'd be angry at the individual because they weren't listening and/or didn't come and ask for clarification if they didn't understand. So my questions to you would be: When your boss gets his ass chewed, is it because his team isn't efficient and streamlined? Has he ever mentioned your team spends too much time on process and workflow and not enough time "their respective punch lists" as you state? Does your tool leverage languages and software packages that you already have in house (care and feeding after your gone)?
For me, unless you're solving a problem that I have stated as a problem or in some way eluded to I'd say, no thanks, you're fired. Of all the holes in the leaking IT Bucket, is the one you plugged the same one your boss would plug?
Why bother mucking with the real source tree? Just make a clone on your mozilla.org-impostor site with an update that has all the appropriate back doors in it.
Just deliver a DNS spoof/change (like dns cache poison, etc) via another exploit, get the browser to self-update (and clean up your previous exploit tracks) and then sit back and wait to spring your trap. The only code change you need to insert at first is to get future updates from the impostor site.
Later on you can 'update' the browser to proxy all $MONEY web traffic through you and your proxy farm. You could even add a new trusted CA to your code base to make it all the more convincing and to cover tracks from the 'imposter-mozilla.org' cert in case it's discovered and revoked.
Funny thing about the 'act' that was passed is it has a clause about congressional review. So at some point, congress could have said "This is stupid" and undone the DST change. Everyone was waiting for the fall session to start, I suspect, to ensure the DST change was going to stick.
g ate/usr/src/lib/libc/port/gen/localtime.c?r1=1138& r2=0
Further, if your running Solaris it's not just a TZ patch. There's libc changes:
http://src.opensolaris.org/source/diff/onnv/onnv-
There's also glibc issues in RHEL 2.1 but they're not quite the same as Solaris.
http://kbase.redhat.com/faq/FAQ_41_9949
Cheers,
Rich
Great, but per the parent, how does that save me bundles? I can see savings, being able to pile more VM's on the hardware, but just don't see how we get from a few extra VM's to bundles. Perhaps the OP was talking about the costs of VMWare ESX vs Xen.
VMWare's OS awareness of Windows has advantages. Being able to load one copy of a static DLL shared across VM's can save you bundles of physical ram...
I don't see how that tracks. How is the %2 impact going to save me a bundle? Moving to linux suposedly will save me money if I virtualize or not, don't see how it being virtualization friendly improves things. Are you saying I'll spend less in hardware by switching to linux? Migrating to linux isn't free (man-hours wise), so the hardware savings better be pretty damn substantial to offset it.
I should be sleeping.
Rich
Right... I can see people lining up in droves to use a website that makes them click, enter, type, fumble for token, clickity click... The users are already stupid enough to fall for a phishing scheme. Now you're going to have them deal with all of that stuff too? You open that bank, and I'll keep the current phishable system and make up for the losses in shear volume of fees I charge to customers who defect from your hard to use system to my easy to use bank. There's a reason grandma and grandpa use windows instead of linux... (yeah yeah, 'but that's changing' and reply with the story of how your 120 year old great grandmother is using debian and customizes her kernel using emacs macros) There's no silver bullet here. It's going to be a combination of small things in both email apps, browser apps, security apps and user education that solves this problem. In the mean time diligence, diligence, diligence.
I think it gets a little more fuzzy than you make it out to be. The Steve was also talking about the 20" iMac, which runs at 2Ghz, not the 1.83Ghz Ars tested. So unless you know that the 1.8Ghz G5 vs 2.0ghz G5 difference is the same as the 1.83Ghz intel vs 2.0Ghz intel, it's difficult to make any claims in absence of facts.
I was 100% in agreement with the parent until you pointed this out. Although I suspect these aren't mutually exclusive. GSA is probably the first step. They get your traffic to their network via anyone's hotspot. Then later on they roll out their own "Google WiFI" hotspots in 'major cities' to cut out some middle men.
Beauty about this aproach to me is they haven't had to lay out much infrastructure to do GSA. Just close proximity peering points with the Bay area hotspot provider networks which can be done relatively cheaply. Get you hooked on GSA with low capital expenditures. Then use the usage stats to find out where they can plunk down Goole WiFi and get an instant large user base. Then bring on the location-based google-adsense....
Anyway, I've taken way to long to put this comment out so I'm sure this has been said a few times, probably better than this on down the comment tree. *Sheesh*... they expect me to do real work here....
Move along...
Cheers,
Rich
Isn't the Iroquois confederacy the longest running democracy in the world at 800 years?
http://college.hmco.com/history/readerscomp/naind
USA isn't even the longest running government in North America....On top of that, it wasn't even continuosly running:
http://www.cnn.com/US/9511/debt_limit/countdown/
Cheers,
Rich
Yup.. you hit the nail on the head. They did the same thing with the G4 iMac. They put in less L2 cache in the 'consumer' models. The L2 cache makes a pretty big difference. I couldn't google it, but I remember there being and article where a "digital audio" 533Mhz G4 power mac with 1Mb L2 cache cleaned the clock of a 800Mhz G4 iMac and it's lack of L2 cache when they first came out. Apple's trying to make it worth while to spend the extra cash for the increased speed of the 12" PowerBook. I'd love to see a benchmark between the two to see just now much a difference twice the L2 cache makes.
Cheers,
Rich
Just be careful which D-link adapter you have. The product page for the keyboard doesn't spell it out, but when you go to buy it in the online store it says:
"Important: Requires a Bluetooth enabled Macintosh (either built-in or using the qualified D-Link DBT-120 USB Bluetooth Adapter (older D-Link DWB-120M adapters are not supported). Mac OS X, v10.2.6 or higher required. "
So if you've got the DBT-120 and not the DWB-120M you're set.
Rich