"But, he said, we can't stay on HTTP forever, despite all the investment and engineering that have gone into it. Among the problems with HTTP, said Box, is the fact that it is a [Not Owned By Microsoft] Remote Procedure Call (RPC) protocol; something that one [Non-MS] program (such as a [Netscape] browser) uses to request a [Potentially Unlicensed] service from another program located in another [NOT WINDOWS] computer (the server) in a network without having to understand [Proprietary] network details.
"We have to do something to make it (HTTP) less important," said Box. "If we rely on HTTP we will [Never Own The Internet Right Down To The Roots]. We at least have to raise the level of abstraction, so that we have an industry-wide [Monopoly] way to do long-running requests--I need a way to [Make Money Writing Books On How To Use Our Protocol].
Because a company paid him for the rights to publish the story, and his family continues to draw royalties from it. He didn't write the story for the benefit of the public, he wrote it for his own good.
I believe Smalltalk was originally designed to teach students, though I don't know what the target age was. It's a very simple, intuitive language with no memory manipulation -- I think Java's garbage collection was inspired in part by Smalltalk. Plus, it's pure OO.
Of course, the $5k license will probably keep it out of the hands of children;)
I like to preview a DVD before shelling out for it too, but how is this preferable to renting a DVD and returning it? I'm no eco-nazi or anything, but don't we have enough disposable crap without this?
>> The "Net" wasn't designed to be a "medium" of any sort, individualistic or not. It was simply a way for users of computer systems to access resources on other systems
Actually, the "Net" *is* a medium -- in that it is a means of mass communication (American Heritage Dictionary). Your second statement disagrees with your first.
As you say, though, the "Net" is not Individualistic. Nor does it express any sort of personality, any more than the US Postal Service does. It just passes data from one place to the other. This is what the hype-ers and the critics fail to see when they focus on the means of transportation rather than the message contained therein.
Oh, come on... get ahold of yerself, man
on
Heart of the Net
·
· Score: 1
Katz is displaying the same faulty logic that the "the-internet-is-bad-because-it-contains-pornograp hy" people use -- mistaking the messenger for the message.
It's a means of communication! That's it! What you do with it is up to you, and whether it be good or bad, the medium is more than happy to receive it.
We are not part of some great collective consciousness, anymore than we were when the television came out. Or the telephone. It's a good thing Katz wasn't around when the phone came along -- he'd probably be out dancing around a pole.
they had resources that respawned daily, too? No more stripmining/deforestation/wildlife preservation, just set a comrade down at the ol' spawn site and wait.
But, at least Russia doesn't have undead. Well, ok, they have muslim separatists, but nobody's perfect.
The Web isn't altering the nature of reality. It is, of course, only reflecting.
This statement is in sharp contrast of his article of two days ago in which he writes:
That Americans have become increasingly disconnected from one another and the social capital that binds people since the rise of TV and the Net is an idea much debated since Robert Putnam published Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community two years ago (the book is now out in paperback). The Net -- ironically the world' s most connective medium -- could be radically advancing that trend.
He goes on to illustrate the ways in which individuals are "turning increasingly inward". So, I want to know: Is the internet a contributing factor in this growing social disconnection (altering reality), or are people's online habits merely an indication of what is occurring in RL (reflecting reality)?
Interesting. I've always thought that the service aspect of the software industry was the *development* of the software, not the software itself. FWIW, my company still refers to its code as "product".
You sent the attachment in Microsoft Word format, a secret proprietary format, so I cannot read it. If you send me the plain text, HTML, or PDF, then I could read it.
Isn't PDF a proprietary format of Adobe? True, you can download the reader for free, but is there a means of creating PDF's without paying for the upgrade?
>> There you have it from the man himself. "Once you buy it, you have the right to use it forever."
This is an strikingly disingenuous quote from a man who has gone to great lengths to emphasize that when you purchase Windows you are buying, not software, but the license to use it.
They've made quite clear that Micros~1 is shifting its focus from selling applications to selling *service*. In other words, you are not buying anything, you are renting -- and have the right to use it as long as you continue to pay up.
It's like saying, "Once you buy a satellite dish, you have the right to use it forever". Sure, you do. But unless you pay for the service, all the dish does is hang off the side of your house.
Why not get the degree, get a job, and see if you find the work interesting. The stuff my company does isn't just "implementing what's written in the book". We write cool stuff that doesn't exist, because our business needs call for it.
Complaining that CS is just bookwork -- while still in college -- is like a med student complaining that medicine is just poking at dead people.
The line is in your mind. Those who value art over science would be more apt to consider themselves artists, and vice-versa. Does it change the code? No. The underlying theory? No. All it changes is your approach to programming, and the self-esteem you derive from it. Call it what you will.
Slashdot Mirror
You realize, don't you, that this essay was written when VA was at $239? Current share price is $1.81.
Unless the dude bailed ASAP, I doubt he's "fabulously wealthy".
"But, he said, we can't stay on HTTP forever, despite all the investment and engineering that have gone into it. Among the problems with HTTP, said Box, is the fact that it is a [Not Owned By Microsoft] Remote Procedure Call (RPC) protocol; something that one [Non-MS] program (such as a [Netscape] browser) uses to request a [Potentially Unlicensed] service from another program located in another [NOT WINDOWS] computer (the server) in a network without having to understand [Proprietary] network details.
"We have to do something to make it (HTTP) less important," said Box. "If we rely on HTTP we will [Never Own The Internet Right Down To The Roots]. We at least have to raise the level of abstraction, so that we have an industry-wide [Monopoly] way to do long-running requests--I need a way to [Make Money Writing Books On How To Use Our Protocol].
Somebody get Mr. Valenti a copy of Godel, Escher, Bach -- STAT!!!
Because a company paid him for the rights to publish the story, and his family continues to draw royalties from it. He didn't write the story for the benefit of the public, he wrote it for his own good.
When you die, can I have your house?
Yeah, they've kinda reconsidered that concept. Something about a guy named Kaszcynski.
...
6. Create a website devoted to computer/geek topics, spend a few years cultivating a worldwide audience, and drop da bomb on V-Day.
...
Congratulations!
Culture is being re-defined right before our eyes.
This sounds like that annoying white toga kid in the commercials talking about innovation.
I believe Smalltalk was originally designed to teach students, though I don't know what the target age was. It's a very simple, intuitive language with no memory manipulation -- I think Java's garbage collection was inspired in part by Smalltalk. Plus, it's pure OO.
;)
Of course, the $5k license will probably keep it out of the hands of children
I like to preview a DVD before shelling out for it too, but how is this preferable to renting a DVD and returning it? I'm no eco-nazi or anything, but don't we have enough disposable crap without this?
... with one nit to pick.
>> The "Net" wasn't designed to be a "medium" of any sort, individualistic or not. It was simply a way for users of computer systems to access resources on other systems
Actually, the "Net" *is* a medium -- in that it is a means of mass communication (American Heritage Dictionary). Your second statement disagrees with your first.
As you say, though, the "Net" is not Individualistic. Nor does it express any sort of personality, any more than the US Postal Service does. It just passes data from one place to the other. This is what the hype-ers and the critics fail to see when they focus on the means of transportation rather than the message contained therein.
Katz is displaying the same faulty logic that the "the-internet-is-bad-because-it-contains-pornograp hy" people use -- mistaking the messenger for the message.
It's a means of communication! That's it! What you do with it is up to you, and whether it be good or bad, the medium is more than happy to receive it.
We are not part of some great collective consciousness, anymore than we were when the television came out. Or the telephone. It's a good thing Katz wasn't around when the phone came along -- he'd probably be out dancing around a pole.
The "Information Superhighway"!
They will, but you have to spray this aerosol into the carburetor.
they had resources that respawned daily, too? No more stripmining/deforestation/wildlife preservation, just set a comrade down at the ol' spawn site and wait.
But, at least Russia doesn't have undead. Well, ok, they have muslim separatists, but nobody's perfect.
Lots o' programmers out there waiting for GNOBOL
The Web isn't altering the nature of reality. It is, of course, only reflecting.
This statement is in sharp contrast of his article of two days ago in which he writes:
That Americans have become increasingly disconnected from one another and the social capital that binds people since the rise of TV and the Net is an idea much debated since Robert Putnam published Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community two years ago (the book is now out in paperback). The Net -- ironically the world' s most connective medium -- could be radically advancing that trend.
He goes on to illustrate the ways in which individuals are "turning increasingly inward". So, I want to know: Is the internet a contributing factor in this growing social disconnection (altering reality), or are people's online habits merely an indication of what is occurring in RL (reflecting reality)?
Interesting. I've always thought that the service aspect of the software industry was the *development* of the software, not the software itself. FWIW, my company still refers to its code as "product".
You sent the attachment in Microsoft Word format, a secret proprietary format, so I cannot read it. If you send me the plain text, HTML, or PDF, then I could read it.
Isn't PDF a proprietary format of Adobe? True, you can download the reader for free, but is there a means of creating PDF's without paying for the upgrade?
My Windows95's lifecycle draws to a close at least once a week. Windows98, once every other day.
>> There you have it from the man himself. "Once you buy it, you have the right to use it forever."
This is an strikingly disingenuous quote from a man who has gone to great lengths to emphasize that when you purchase Windows you are buying, not software, but the license to use it.
They've made quite clear that Micros~1 is shifting its focus from selling applications to selling *service*. In other words, you are not buying anything, you are renting -- and have the right to use it as long as you continue to pay up.
It's like saying, "Once you buy a satellite dish, you have the right to use it forever". Sure, you do. But unless you pay for the service, all the dish does is hang off the side of your house.
Please speak slowly and clearly into the browneye, sir.
Why not get the degree, get a job, and see if you find the work interesting. The stuff my company does isn't just "implementing what's written in the book". We write cool stuff that doesn't exist, because our business needs call for it.
Complaining that CS is just bookwork -- while still in college -- is like a med student complaining that medicine is just poking at dead people.
Type in "monopoly" and you get "innovation".
Type in "patch" and you get "exciting new experience in personal computing ( $99.99 upgrade )"
Hey, mirko : Check your spelling : CosomosBay
The line is in your mind. Those who value art over science would be more apt to consider themselves artists, and vice-versa. Does it change the code? No. The underlying theory? No. All it changes is your approach to programming, and the self-esteem you derive from it. Call it what you will.