Computing goes in cycles, as always. There's nothing new about the concept. Now, stuff is moving online to server farms, since companies are able to manage resources most effectively. In another decade or so, things may start to come back to desktop computing. Maybe people will have small servers built into their routers that all devices will sync to, i don't know.
And if things do end up moving all the way to hosted solutions, with the standard being thin clients in every home, why would we bother with one in each city? Bandwidth's getting cheap enough now that we could go with two or three hubs to a continent and have that be our computers.
In which case they could downgrade. I would at least hope that firefox will make that task somewhat easy. The thing to remember is that security/bugfix updates are (almost) always-you guessed it-fixing bugs and security holes. The better way to go IMO is to fix the problems you know and give a chance to revert in case the fix breaks some other untested thing.
And how does seeing "This application has an update" allow you to magically deduce whether the update will be good or not? If you're decently tech savvy you'll probably just look and see if it is a major version, and if not just update and be done with it. If you're not, you'll hide the update in the corner and treat it like the devil, and maybe call your poor poor cousin to help you out. They already said that major updates will still ask for confirmation, and for security updates all parties are better off with auto updates. Unless you're a security auditing nazi, in which case you can disable the auto-update feature for yourself, no one's stopping you.
Packages are only slow to update if they are part of a lethargic/paranoid distribution Very little patching is generally involved. Packages are almost always designed to be installed to root, but you're right that it is possible to install it for single users. Using Arch, update times are hardly ever a problem.
It won't be becoming corporate in the foreseeable future, but if IE really bites the dust then Firefox could be seen in the light of slow and memory-leaking. We'll see if FF4 fixes this.
I have a linux machine at home running an ssh server. I like this, it allows a lot of flexibility in what I do anywhere. This constitutes a web server. I would also like to get a personal website running soon as a place to host projects. Does any of this make me a small business? No? That's right, and I shouldn't have to pay the fees of a small business customer for home use.
I think the big difference is that much more focus was given to training the teachers in OLPC, while in the NC study they tried (and failed) the fire-and-forget strategy. Computers are no more magical at improving learning than calculators, encyclopedias, or whatever tool you can attempt to hand out, let sit for a month and see what happens.
Teach them as much as you can, as fast as you can (within reason, of course) and if they complain that they can't understand some of the stuff, slow down.
then having a computer in the house is not going to magically make it appear. If they do, however, computers are the single most valuable resource available in doing so.
How would this guy be responsible for the bug? Did he create it? Did he break into the M$ servers and implant the bug in the source code? If you want to be whiny and lump the blame on someone, find the coder who wrote the code with the bug. The Google employee is only being responsible and notifying the public about a standing security hole that needs to be protected against. Security through obscurity is no security at all.
I dunno, I'm not sure I feel safe with all of my web traffic going through a little box, no matter who it's offered by. I like my privacy, and having it go through Comcast is bad enough.
My issue with online advertising in the first place is not the bandwidth use, it's the stupid flashing *LOOK AT ME* things at the side of the screen. Depending on how the ads are structured for how they count views, chrome's model might actually be better in that webpages don't have to pursue any anti-adblock strategies. At least until ad companies catch on that their ads aren't actually being viewed, that is...
I assume you can build chromium for PPC yourself. It's understandable that Google doesn't want to say their actual product works with PPC when they can't test it extensively, but I see no reason why it wouldn't work. Just ass-covering.
According to chrom(ium), I've been using v5 already. It seems pretty much the same, but hey, if they want to update then by all means, have at it. Still prefer Konqueror+webkitpart.
Mods are voted for and against for users. This is generally all that is needed.
And the question would be the same if some huge game got their codebase hacked and replaced with conflickr. Mod devs just have to be careful.
Yeah, the best way of managing sleep patterns is getting a job where your policy can be "I sleep when I wanna sleep and I get up when I f***ing wanna get up!"
Chromium is an open source project. Open source projects have community developers. They have to look at the code to change it. They are not whining about privacy violations. As a user who has not looked over the source code and checked for the, uh, evil google snooping service, what makes you think you have some knowledge about Chromium's privacy issues?
I think this is a great move for Ubuntu to a more modern and less bloated browser. Also it advances Webkit, the renderer that powers a huge selection of smaller browser projects I happen to like.
In regards to plugins, the most important one in existence (adblock plus) works fine in Chromium, as do a decent selection of youtube downloaders. What are you complaining about again?
Slashdot Mirror
Computing goes in cycles, as always. There's nothing new about the concept. Now, stuff is moving online to server farms, since companies are able to manage resources most effectively. In another decade or so, things may start to come back to desktop computing. Maybe people will have small servers built into their routers that all devices will sync to, i don't know.
And if things do end up moving all the way to hosted solutions, with the standard being thin clients in every home, why would we bother with one in each city? Bandwidth's getting cheap enough now that we could go with two or three hubs to a continent and have that be our computers.
"We need air support at coordin *call dropped*
I wonder if the service provider *cough at&t cough* would be liable for troops' lives.
In which case they could downgrade. I would at least hope that firefox will make that task somewhat easy. The thing to remember is that security/bugfix updates are (almost) always-you guessed it-fixing bugs and security holes. The better way to go IMO is to fix the problems you know and give a chance to revert in case the fix breaks some other untested thing.
And how does seeing "This application has an update" allow you to magically deduce whether the update will be good or not? If you're decently tech savvy you'll probably just look and see if it is a major version, and if not just update and be done with it. If you're not, you'll hide the update in the corner and treat it like the devil, and maybe call your poor poor cousin to help you out. They already said that major updates will still ask for confirmation, and for security updates all parties are better off with auto updates. Unless you're a security auditing nazi, in which case you can disable the auto-update feature for yourself, no one's stopping you.
Packages are only slow to update if they are part of a lethargic/paranoid distribution Very little patching is generally involved. Packages are almost always designed to be installed to root, but you're right that it is possible to install it for single users. Using Arch, update times are hardly ever a problem.
Rumor is that a software store (and assumedly a unified update manager) are coming to Windows 8.That'd be nice.
In the context of "here have some cash", 15% is pretty often.
It won't be becoming corporate in the foreseeable future, but if IE really bites the dust then Firefox could be seen in the light of slow and memory-leaking. We'll see if FF4 fixes this.
I'll stick with my chromium and see what happens.
I have a linux machine at home running an ssh server. I like this, it allows a lot of flexibility in what I do anywhere. This constitutes a web server. I would also like to get a personal website running soon as a place to host projects. Does any of this make me a small business? No? That's right, and I shouldn't have to pay the fees of a small business customer for home use.
I think the big difference is that much more focus was given to training the teachers in OLPC, while in the NC study they tried (and failed) the fire-and-forget strategy. Computers are no more magical at improving learning than calculators, encyclopedias, or whatever tool you can attempt to hand out, let sit for a month and see what happens.
Teach them as much as you can, as fast as you can (within reason, of course) and if they complain that they can't understand some of the stuff, slow down.
then having a computer in the house is not going to magically make it appear. If they do, however, computers are the single most valuable resource available in doing so.
And last I checked, steam ran fine under linux. So it's all good.
To clarify, it has been quite a while since I did check.
How would this guy be responsible for the bug? Did he create it? Did he break into the M$ servers and implant the bug in the source code? If you want to be whiny and lump the blame on someone, find the coder who wrote the code with the bug. The Google employee is only being responsible and notifying the public about a standing security hole that needs to be protected against. Security through obscurity is no security at all.
I dunno, I'm not sure I feel safe with all of my web traffic going through a little box, no matter who it's offered by. I like my privacy, and having it go through Comcast is bad enough.
My issue with online advertising in the first place is not the bandwidth use, it's the stupid flashing *LOOK AT ME* things at the side of the screen. Depending on how the ads are structured for how they count views, chrome's model might actually be better in that webpages don't have to pursue any anti-adblock strategies. At least until ad companies catch on that their ads aren't actually being viewed, that is...
I assume you can build chromium for PPC yourself. It's understandable that Google doesn't want to say their actual product works with PPC when they can't test it extensively, but I see no reason why it wouldn't work. Just ass-covering.
What are you talking about? I have the adblock extension running now. Just get it at Chrome Extensions-Adblock
Unless Chrome doesn't have the same addon structure as Chromium, in which case you're on your own.
According to chrom(ium), I've been using v5 already. It seems pretty much the same, but hey, if they want to update then by all means, have at it. Still prefer Konqueror+webkitpart.
When you can't solve it, quantify it! It'll make you better, trust me...
Mods are voted for and against for users. This is generally all that is needed. And the question would be the same if some huge game got their codebase hacked and replaced with conflickr. Mod devs just have to be careful.
Yeah, the best way of managing sleep patterns is getting a job where your policy can be "I sleep when I wanna sleep and I get up when I f***ing wanna get up!"
Chromium is an open source project. Open source projects have community developers. They have to look at the code to change it. They are not whining about privacy violations. As a user who has not looked over the source code and checked for the, uh, evil google snooping service, what makes you think you have some knowledge about Chromium's privacy issues? I think this is a great move for Ubuntu to a more modern and less bloated browser. Also it advances Webkit, the renderer that powers a huge selection of smaller browser projects I happen to like. In regards to plugins, the most important one in existence (adblock plus) works fine in Chromium, as do a decent selection of youtube downloaders. What are you complaining about again?
7: Slick like windows, shiny like windows, shatters like windows. I would like to advise ubuntu.com as the most surefire bugfix.
Come now, they're not all that bad. Any Qt app owns them, of course, but its better than tk...