Yes, but then you'd have an easy way to identify domains from a spam-friendly registrar: just look at the 3LDN.
You mean like.co.uk?
and even if you could, you'd end up filtering a lot of innocent sites
Um, why would you not expect that to be a problem for 3LD registrars?
Anyway, I question your definition of $50/year as "unaffordable."
Oh, sorry, I thought that was just an example. If you want to keep spammers from buying and throwing away domains you need to make it too expensive for them, and I doubt $50 would be enough to do the job... and once you get the price high enough to deter spammers, it's going to deter non-spammers as well.
Gee, over the past few years the news has been all about how doing a GPU for a console not only lost you money, but also pulled resources away from the profitable PC market, and the last few exchanges between ATI and nVidia holding first place in that market have been attributed to this.
Intel needs any kind of GPU win, badly, and they're big enough and rich enough they can afford to lose money on each chip and make it up on volume.
It's Sony I worry about, given how utterly appalling Intel GPUs have traditionally been.
So I gotta wonder, why do you think nVidia is worried about this?
and low-visibility sites don't need second level domains
Long-lasting websites need domains at whatever level puts them outside the control of a single ISP or ASP. If that's the second level, then that means they need SLDs. If there's a third level that you can just register a domain under without being tied to a given ISP (eg, state.us), then they need that kind of third level domain.
The thing is, if you made SLDs unaffordable, then there would be a demand for reliable third-level registrars, and many many people would switch to using reliable 3LD registrars, and the same problem would exist at the third level instead of the second.
Quoting Douglas Adams, "To summarize the summary, people are the problem."
When I was looking at Lively I ran into Google Update, and I'm pretty unhappy with it. It installs a component in your browser that will initiate an update or a new product install without you even having to click on a link... the download is triggered by the Google Update API just by a javascript call on any web page.
See the comments on this Google Code trouble ticket and the linked discussion here. It's allegedly using some component created by Microsoft called Click Once... but I don't recall getting that or any other dialog when I installed Lively.
I started the video, and it stuttered, and started over... with an actual demonstration of Windows 7. I had to reload the page to get the KDE4 prank video.
It works I guess, but just rezzing a 3d single-bar graph, let along the 4d ones (x,y,z,size) ones I saw in the first demo video, took pretty long. Kind of reminded me of the old days waiting for the Versatek and Calcomp plotters in Evans Hall.:)
Yah, I should horrified by a couple of megabytes for an application, but when a Windows 7 install is several GIGAbytes... there's no way you can compete with that.
The point of OSS isn't having access to the source. It's having EVERYONE having access to the source, and a mechanism for EVERYONE to be able to offer contributions to the source, and to distribute patches outside the developers' control, and even fork the source and release their own version if they don't like where the original developers are taking it. Open source works because it's an open market of ideas, not because you can read the source code.
Read-only access to a snapshot of the source code that you can't share with anyone else is utterly irrelevant to why open source is important.
Those graphs look interesting, but that doesn't seem really cross-platform. I can't see how you could possibly rez up models of that size and complexity in Second Life like you can in Project Wonderland, the fundamental approach to VR is completely different. Do you have an example video there? Have you considered Croquet as a target instead?
I'm a BSD bum, so I haven't paid too much attention to what the left hand's been doing, but...
I was pretty shocked at the time it took Linux to boot, and how big it was. What the hell are they putting in there... two gigabytes, what are they including in Linux these days? Over a minute to boot... how much of that boot time was in the BIOS?
They'll do it by redefining open source. After all, they can wrap a proprietary file format up in XML so that instead of being a bunch of undocumented blobs in a binary stew they're a bunch of undocumented blobs in an XML stew, and manage to convince people to say things like this...
The proprietary file formats that have protected Microsoft apps have been offset by Office Open XML, the default format for Office 2007 and now an international standard.
I read the spec and looked at the web pages and, frankly, I don't understand what the point is. WHat's the problem this protocol solves. Why would you use it?
If you're talking about the music store, yes. If you're talking about the PC application, I'm going to have to turn my head to the side and shoot my green tea out my nose.
I don't want to know about your fetishes.
I've used music players on Windows and *nix, commercial and free, and all of them suck dirty swamp water through moldy sweat socks. iTunes sucks less than most. It could be that there's one or two that suck less than iTunes, but it's near the top of the smelly heap.
* Skinned user interfaces. No. Hell no. Any application that doesn't at least TRY to stick to the native user interface is right off my short list.
* WinAmp, derivitives, and clones. Ugh. Just... ugh.
* Windows Media Player, Realplayer, other applications based on the Windows HTML control. No thanks, I'd rather run through the hot ward at a plague hospital snogging the ebola patients.
All software sucks. Music player software sucks more than most. iTunes works, it's got some nice features, you can rip the Quicktime out of the OS. In this market, I count that as a win. Maybe my standards are low, but I've earned those low standards in the trenches.
Good point. I reflexively turn off pretty much all browser plugins... I would much rather download a file than have it open in some buggy piece of crap in my browser (yes, Acrobat Reader, I'm looking at you... no, REINSTALLING the plugin when I just run Reader after I've explicitly removed it is NOT cricket) and I blocked those beggars so long ago that I'd forgotten I had to.
Slashdot Mirror
Smalltalk did this in the '70s, and the idea goes back to APL in the early '60s.
I could speculate about the reasons this never seems to become mainstream, but instead I'll just point that out and let other people do that... :)
Yes, but then you'd have an easy way to identify domains from a spam-friendly registrar: just look at the 3LDN.
You mean like .co.uk?
and even if you could, you'd end up filtering a lot of innocent sites
Um, why would you not expect that to be a problem for 3LD registrars?
Anyway, I question your definition of $50/year as "unaffordable."
Oh, sorry, I thought that was just an example. If you want to keep spammers from buying and throwing away domains you need to make it too expensive for them, and I doubt $50 would be enough to do the job... and once you get the price high enough to deter spammers, it's going to deter non-spammers as well.
Gee, over the past few years the news has been all about how doing a GPU for a console not only lost you money, but also pulled resources away from the profitable PC market, and the last few exchanges between ATI and nVidia holding first place in that market have been attributed to this.
Intel needs any kind of GPU win, badly, and they're big enough and rich enough they can afford to lose money on each chip and make it up on volume.
It's Sony I worry about, given how utterly appalling Intel GPUs have traditionally been.
So I gotta wonder, why do you think nVidia is worried about this?
and low-visibility sites don't need second level domains
Long-lasting websites need domains at whatever level puts them outside the control of a single ISP or ASP. If that's the second level, then that means they need SLDs. If there's a third level that you can just register a domain under without being tied to a given ISP (eg, state.us), then they need that kind of third level domain.
The thing is, if you made SLDs unaffordable, then there would be a demand for reliable third-level registrars, and many many people would switch to using reliable 3LD registrars, and the same problem would exist at the third level instead of the second.
Quoting Douglas Adams, "To summarize the summary, people are the problem."
Well, damn, I suppose that's good news for me, since I'm currently working in Storage. :)
When I was looking at Lively I ran into Google Update, and I'm pretty unhappy with it. It installs a component in your browser that will initiate an update or a new product install without you even having to click on a link... the download is triggered by the Google Update API just by a javascript call on any web page.
See the comments on this Google Code trouble ticket and the linked discussion here. It's allegedly using some component created by Microsoft called Click Once... but I don't recall getting that or any other dialog when I installed Lively.
I started the video, and it stuttered, and started over... with an actual demonstration of Windows 7. I had to reload the page to get the KDE4 prank video.
Was that supposed to be some kind of Zen test?
It works I guess, but just rezzing a 3d single-bar graph, let along the 4d ones (x,y,z,size) ones I saw in the first demo video, took pretty long. Kind of reminded me of the old days waiting for the Versatek and Calcomp plotters in Evans Hall. :)
Yah, I should horrified by a couple of megabytes for an application, but when a Windows 7 install is several GIGAbytes... there's no way you can compete with that.
The point of OSS isn't having access to the source. It's having EVERYONE having access to the source, and a mechanism for EVERYONE to be able to offer contributions to the source, and to distribute patches outside the developers' control, and even fork the source and release their own version if they don't like where the original developers are taking it. Open source works because it's an open market of ideas, not because you can read the source code.
Read-only access to a snapshot of the source code that you can't share with anyone else is utterly irrelevant to why open source is important.
I'm wondering whose fault it was that one member of the alliance had that much power.
If there are mechanisms in-game for shared responsibility for assets and BoB didn't take advantage of them, that's BoB's problem.
If the game forced them to structure their alliance so one person COULD take them down, that's EVE's fault.
Windows users will not install QT unless it comes as part of the whole one-click .msi for the package.
Hmmm, let's see...
QtCore4.dll 1,544 KB
QtGui4.dll 6,284 KB
QtXml4.dll 384 KB
A little fat, maybe. But you can stick them in your application directory.
Those graphs look interesting, but that doesn't seem really cross-platform. I can't see how you could possibly rez up models of that size and complexity in Second Life like you can in Project Wonderland, the fundamental approach to VR is completely different. Do you have an example video there? Have you considered Croquet as a target instead?
I'm a BSD bum, so I haven't paid too much attention to what the left hand's been doing, but...
I was pretty shocked at the time it took Linux to boot, and how big it was. What the hell are they putting in there... two gigabytes, what are they including in Linux these days? Over a minute to boot... how much of that boot time was in the BIOS?
It's not the content of popups that is the problem. It's the popups themselves.
And in any case... it doesn't seem to be working for Firefox 3.0.6.
But XSLT is *so* easy!
Sure, it's called "cancer".
they're covalent, not ionic.
They'll do it by redefining open source. After all, they can wrap a proprietary file format up in XML so that instead of being a bunch of undocumented blobs in a binary stew they're a bunch of undocumented blobs in an XML stew, and manage to convince people to say things like this...
The proprietary file formats that have protected Microsoft apps have been offset by Office Open XML, the default format for Office 2007 and now an international standard.
What kind of program are you thinking about? What's an actual application?
I read the spec and looked at the web pages and, frankly, I don't understand what the point is. WHat's the problem this protocol solves. Why would you use it?
If you're talking about the music store, yes. If you're talking about the PC application, I'm going to have to turn my head to the side and shoot my green tea out my nose.
I don't want to know about your fetishes.
I've used music players on Windows and *nix, commercial and free, and all of them suck dirty swamp water through moldy sweat socks. iTunes sucks less than most. It could be that there's one or two that suck less than iTunes, but it's near the top of the smelly heap.
* Skinned user interfaces. No. Hell no. Any application that doesn't at least TRY to stick to the native user interface is right off my short list.
* WinAmp, derivitives, and clones. Ugh. Just... ugh.
* Windows Media Player, Realplayer, other applications based on the Windows HTML control. No thanks, I'd rather run through the hot ward at a plague hospital snogging the ebola patients.
All software sucks. Music player software sucks more than most. iTunes works, it's got some nice features, you can rip the Quicktime out of the OS. In this market, I count that as a win. Maybe my standards are low, but I've earned those low standards in the trenches.
How come none of the labels have launched a similair service (it's not really the most original idea of all times)?
You mean like the Sony Music Store?
What, you never heard of it? Perhaps that's because Sony's been systematically alienating their customers since the Walkman/Discman era?
Good point. I reflexively turn off pretty much all browser plugins... I would much rather download a file than have it open in some buggy piece of crap in my browser (yes, Acrobat Reader, I'm looking at you... no, REINSTALLING the plugin when I just run Reader after I've explicitly removed it is NOT cricket) and I blocked those beggars so long ago that I'd forgotten I had to.
Is it just me or is that redundant?