Someone wanting to release information that is hugely beneficial to humanity but will get them killed for it (another terrorist only use)
I wouldn't trust tinyurl.com not to keep logs with enough info to identify me if somebody was that desparate to find me. Far better to go through a service that is, at least, supposed to be anonymous.
URLs could be checked on the serverside on availability for example; if your URL is phony, then it's rejected. I suppose that would make massive DOS-attacks possible
It would also prevent tinyurl being useful for private URLs (e.g. those behind firewalls which only allow connections from known IP addresses). You can also use currently use tinyurl with protocols that the tinyurl server knows nothing about, e.g. ed2k: or magnet:.
The better solution is just to disallow any single IP from creating more than, say, 10 URLs in an hour. This would make such a filesystem implementation useless without overly restricting legitimate users.
Well, in any case, rail services are doing very well in the rest of Europe, so this at least proves privatization is not needed to get good rail service.
True. The UK government simply hoped that privatisation would be a great way of fixing the problems they had caused. It wasn't.
Btw, isn't the state of the electric grid in the USA not another example why you should not privatize public services?
No, it's an example of why setting it up in a way that's based on stock market derivitives is a bad idea. This allowed traders to make a fortune from the market without actually benefitting the consumer at all, just because they had knowledge of how to game such markets (by realising that the power they had available to sell would fetch a better price if they caused artificial scarcity).
You can privatize public services, but there has to be some limitations on the market, such as an obligation on the generators to sell as much power as can be produced at some cap price if it is offered.
Is the BBC homepage supposed to reflect some important or signifigant user base?
Yes. It is probably the broadest cross section of mostly British web users you are likely to find on a single site.
The fact that nearly 10% of those users use firefox is particularly relevant, and is a good weapon for those of us who do commercial web design to persuade our clients that the extra work to support alternative browsers properly *is* worth it.
There's no reliable way of counting visitors short of requiring registration and banning people from viewing the pages until they are logged in, and even then you have to deal with things like BugMeNot.
No, but the simple expedient of setting a cookie, then ignoring as a repeat visitor any hit that either has the cookie or is not specifying a cookie but is using the same user agent and coming from the same IP address within some time limit (e.g. 5 minutes) works in over 99% of cases, which is good enough for most purposes.
But i`m not sure if mozilla reloads a page from the server if you press back or not.
No it doesn't. Even if you've seen a more recent version of the same page, with the same URL, it will show the page you originally got if it is still in its cache (i.e. most of the time, unless the server requests otherwise).
So what is the solution to their "problem"? Are they going to ban open source software because it drives profit making companies into the ground?
The solution to their problem is the same approach that I usually propose to all government IT spending: when assessing the options available for any project, an equal but opposite factor to the cost of the project to the government should be the tangible benefit that will be derived by the local economy.
So, for instance, say we need to equip a department with a file server and twenty workstations, and get a support contract to ensure that they're kept operating. We have a company that's offering to do it with Windows, and will charge $15,000. We have a company that's offering to do it with Linux for $16,000. Both companies are local small businesses. Which one is the best deal for the government? Clearly the Linux company, because they will be keeping a larger volume of the cash. In the case of money that goes to MS, they will have to consider whether it will cause MS to employ more people in their region (unlikely) and what the benefit to MS shareholders in their region will be (small).
So, it takes a billion (1,000,000,000) years for single-celled organisms to evolve. On planet with at least a billion-billion (1,000,000,000,000,000,000) bits of organic building blocks in it's oceans, randomly and constantly thrown together.
Don't forget to multiply in the number of planets in the universe capable of supporting such organic building blocks, and who can even begin to predict how many that is? Millions don't even begin to get close, I would guess.
This is why most european rail service actually work at the moment even if they don't bring in much money, while UK rail service blows and is overpriced.
You've bought into the propoganda, I'm afraid. The real problem was that the railways were in a disastrous state at the time of privatisation due to mismanagement by successive governments who wanted to increase the profitability of the network. More info.
Another problem was the fact that all of BR's rolling stock was sold to leasing companies who went on to charge exorbitant rates to the service operators (who generally were unable to afford the upfront investment required to purchase new rolling stock, at least at the beginning). This drove up costs and pushed enormous profits into the hands of a few financiers, but was of no benefit at all to the public. A better approach would have been to give this equipment to railtrack and allow them to deal with it: they could then have used these profits to subsides track repairs.
Important note about the linked site -- it seems to me to be a scam site. There is no such thing as copyright registration in the UK, yet these people are operating a site that seems to represent itself as some kind of official registration service. Doesn't affect the information on it, just a warning that I have no idea who they are and sending your copyright work to them might not be the smartest move.
The fact that Peter Pan is a "cultural treasure" is all the more reason to let him pass into the public domain, rather than remain in the hands of a single comany that could (say) whore him out in commercials when it's running low on cash...
The condition for the extension of copyright in this case was that the copyight be donated to a charity that had come to be associated with the character (the Great Ormond Street Hospital). Click here and search for "peter pan" for more info.
Have you ever tried an LED light? They suck!!! They do not cast nearly enough light. The light color is a disturbing and unnatural color, usually with too much blue in it.
Did you... err... even read the summary? This is about a new way of producing LEDs so that their colour looks more natural.
Try an LED flash light and then try a xenon Mag Light and tell me which one rocks your socks.
I have one of each here. Unfortunately, the xenon light weighs about twenty times as much due to the weight of its battery. It produces more light, but not enough more that I'm willing to forgive its shorter battery life. My LED light (which is actually a home-made one, with 24 high output LEDs in white and yellow) produces an adequate amount of light for off-road cycling, illuminating clear detail ~ 5-10 metres ahead of me, and has an 8 hour battery life from a pack of standard NiMH rechargeables.
They are NOT better.
Depends on the application. I also use LED lighting for low level lighting to leave on at night. It's perfect for this application as it has a narrow spectrum that isn't disturbing when I'm trying to sleep, but provides enough light that I am able to distinguish obstacles and move around the house without having to turn the main lights on.
Like Fluorescent, requires supporting circuitry -- doesn't plug directly into AC wiring.
You can connect LEDs directly to AC if you want. They'll flicker, but if you connect two sets in parallel but with opposite polarity, it generally isn't noticeable. You can even build a bridge rectifier from them.
You'd still need a transformer to bring the voltage down to something useful, but that's nothing like as complex as the support circuitry required for a flourescent.
Mind you, the cost of compact flourescents with integrated support circuitry has come down substantially in the last few years. I'm now able to get 9-17 W CF "bulbs" at about $1 per unit.
No, a.ini file of that kind really only defines the data. The structure of the data in this case would basically be a list containing the details of which names could have meaningful values associated with them, and perhaps some kind of restrictions on what the values could be.
But the guy talking about XDR above is probably onto something.:)
There are few things that the half-assed clones and Sid Meier's Civilization have in common that is not already in this: Civilization
Are you joking?
1. The board game was developed under license from Microprose (as they were at the time). 2. The game play of the board game is *nothing* like the gameplay of the video games. FreeCiv follows the various Civ tech trees much more closely than the board game, has wonders that are identical in every way to Civ/CivII (whereas the board game wonders have substantially different effects, and are built in a rather different way), and has the same unit selection as civ (whereas the board game only has a very limited unit selection). The board game does not feature city building. The board game resolves combat in an entirely different way.
(although looking at the pictures you've linked to, that's a different board game from the one I played, it looks like it plays by the same principles... probably just an earlier version of it)
Also the half-assed clones have features that are missing in the Civ games, or have been implemented there much later (useable networked gaming, hex tilesets, etc.)
Most gamers I've discussed this with think that using hexagonal layouts for TBS games is actually inferior to square-with-diagonals like Civ, as it restricts movement to 6 directions, rather than the 8 available in Civ. While FreeCiv has network play, which was apparently added as an afterthought to the Civilization franchise, playing against computer players just doesn't work as well. Playing against FreeCiv AI on its hardest level I can easily beat it; against CivII I don't stand a chance unless I have a very lucky start. It also seems to lack a level that is as easy as Civ's easiest. I'm not familiar with any clones other than freeciv, so can't really comment on them.
You're not reading it right. It's part 'c' that's the key: it doesn't only transfer the data, it also transfers a description of how the data is structured.
Think of a relational database with the capability of copying its content to a remote server and you're on the right lines.
The first patent (5,842,213) doesn't cover all applications of XML. It might cover some, however. The most relevant claim is this one:
11. A method of transferring data in electronic form from a computer comprising the steps of:
a) organizing and storing the data in neutral form that is to be transferred;
b) organizing and storing the names, definitions and properties of the structural tags used to express the data in neutral form; and
c) transferring the data expressed in neutral form along with the names, definitions and properties of the structural tags that make up that neutral form data.
Which sounds to me like it would cover transferring XML with a schema embedded within the document, or transferring both the document and linked schema at the same time. Other uses of XML would still be allowed.
This claim is probably too general to survive reeximanation, though. It basically amounts to "transferring data and information about how the data is structured together". I'm sure somebody with a better knowledge of IT history than me can very easily name some prior art for that one.
12. The method of claim 11, wherein the names, definitions and properties of the structural tags used to express the data in neutral form are themselves treated as data and expressed in neutral form.
The schema is encoded in the same format as the data. Also a relevant claim to XML with embedded schemas. Rules out prior art that transferred data and a program that could process it together, unless the program was expressed in a similar structure to the data (LISP programs might count here).
13. The method of claim 11, further including the steps of:
a) adopting a compatible system of data typing;
b) using the system to express in neutral form both the data values of a set of information being transferred and the names, definitions, and properties of their associated structural tags; and
c) combining and transferring both the data values and the names, definitions and properties of the structural tags of the data values in a single neutral form transfer file.
I don't quite follow this one. Anyone got any ideas what it means?
14. A method of incorporating neutral form data values and the names, definitions and properties of their associated structural tags into an existing computer environment comprising the steps of:
a) comparing the names, definitions and properties of the components of the structural tags of the data values with those present in the existing environment;
b) entering a data value structural tag component name, definition and properties into the dictionary system of the existing environment if it is not already present; and
c) recording equivalency where a structural tag component in the dictionary system of the existing environment is found to be different but equivalent;
d) thereafter, adding the data values into the neutral form file of the existing environment.
Merging two XML files by combining their schema, then combining their data.
15. The method of claim 14, wherein the neutral form data values are new data values.
16. The method of claim 14, wherein the neutral form data values are transferred data values.
Different reasons why you may want to do 14.
17. The method of claim 14, further including the step of incorporating a unique authoring designator of the originating environment during the naming of components of structural tags to insure a lack of overlap between the structural components of a data value and those in the existing environment.
Could be construed to cover XML namespaces, if you read it right. This stands a chance of being novel, seeing as XML namespaces had not been implemented in '97 when the patent was filed.
The second patent seems less relevant -- it seems to relate to the same application that the first patent covered, but doesn't seem to add much to it that is relevant to XML. It is worth noting that the second is explicitly about a data serialization format, probably fairly similar in scope to the Java's java.io.Object[Out/In]putStream classes.
While technologically XML is a descendent of SGML, it's used for a substantially different goal: SGML is intended for markup of documents, XML is intended for rendering non-document structured data in a way that allows it to be processed independently of its data type.
As these patents are very clearly about data, not documents, I don't think SGML is a valid antecedent.
That doesn't mean there aren't any. ASN.1 or S-Exprs spring to mind as candidates.
Slashdot Mirror
Someone wanting to release information that is hugely beneficial to humanity but will get them killed for it (another terrorist only use)
I wouldn't trust tinyurl.com not to keep logs with enough info to identify me if somebody was that desparate to find me. Far better to go through a service that is, at least, supposed to be anonymous.
But why would that host ever be tinyurl.com?
URLs could be checked on the serverside on availability for example; if your URL is phony, then it's rejected. I suppose that would make massive DOS-attacks possible
It would also prevent tinyurl being useful for private URLs (e.g. those behind firewalls which only allow connections from known IP addresses). You can also use currently use tinyurl with protocols that the tinyurl server knows nothing about, e.g. ed2k: or magnet:.
The better solution is just to disallow any single IP from creating more than, say, 10 URLs in an hour. This would make such a filesystem implementation useless without overly restricting legitimate users.
Well, in any case, rail services are doing very well in the rest of Europe, so this at least proves privatization is not needed to get good rail service.
True. The UK government simply hoped that privatisation would be a great way of fixing the problems they had caused. It wasn't.
Btw, isn't the state of the electric grid in the USA not another example why you should not privatize public services?
No, it's an example of why setting it up in a way that's based on stock market derivitives is a bad idea. This allowed traders to make a fortune from the market without actually benefitting the consumer at all, just because they had knowledge of how to game such markets (by realising that the power they had available to sell would fetch a better price if they caused artificial scarcity).
You can privatize public services, but there has to be some limitations on the market, such as an obligation on the generators to sell as much power as can be produced at some cap price if it is offered.
Is the BBC homepage supposed to reflect some important or signifigant user base?
Yes. It is probably the broadest cross section of mostly British web users you are likely to find on a single site.
The fact that nearly 10% of those users use firefox is particularly relevant, and is a good weapon for those of us who do commercial web design to persuade our clients that the extra work to support alternative browsers properly *is* worth it.
There's no reliable way of counting visitors short of requiring registration and banning people from viewing the pages until they are logged in, and even then you have to deal with things like BugMeNot.
No, but the simple expedient of setting a cookie, then ignoring as a repeat visitor any hit that either has the cookie or is not specifying a cookie but is using the same user agent and coming from the same IP address within some time limit (e.g. 5 minutes) works in over 99% of cases, which is good enough for most purposes.
But i`m not sure if mozilla reloads a page from the server if you press back or not.
No it doesn't. Even if you've seen a more recent version of the same page, with the same URL, it will show the page you originally got if it is still in its cache (i.e. most of the time, unless the server requests otherwise).
So what is the solution to their "problem"? Are they going to ban open source software because it drives profit making companies into the ground?
The solution to their problem is the same approach that I usually propose to all government IT spending: when assessing the options available for any project, an equal but opposite factor to the cost of the project to the government should be the tangible benefit that will be derived by the local economy.
So, for instance, say we need to equip a department with a file server and twenty workstations, and get a support contract to ensure that they're kept operating. We have a company that's offering to do it with Windows, and will charge $15,000. We have a company that's offering to do it with Linux for $16,000. Both companies are local small businesses. Which one is the best deal for the government? Clearly the Linux company, because they will be keeping a larger volume of the cash. In the case of money that goes to MS, they will have to consider whether it will cause MS to employ more people in their region (unlikely) and what the benefit to MS shareholders in their region will be (small).
Is this the same Los Alamos that lost 2 computer tapes containing nuclear secrets?
Probably the same Los Alamos that has flying saucers in the basement, if you believe everything you read.
So, it takes a billion (1,000,000,000) years for single-celled organisms to evolve. On planet with at least a billion-billion (1,000,000,000,000,000,000) bits of organic building blocks in it's oceans, randomly and constantly thrown together.
Don't forget to multiply in the number of planets in the universe capable of supporting such organic building blocks, and who can even begin to predict how many that is? Millions don't even begin to get close, I would guess.
This is why most european rail service actually work at the moment even if they don't bring in much money, while UK rail service blows and is overpriced.
You've bought into the propoganda, I'm afraid. The real problem was that the railways were in a disastrous state at the time of privatisation due to mismanagement by successive governments who wanted to increase the profitability of the network. More info.
Another problem was the fact that all of BR's rolling stock was sold to leasing companies who went on to charge exorbitant rates to the service operators (who generally were unable to afford the upfront investment required to purchase new rolling stock, at least at the beginning). This drove up costs and pushed enormous profits into the hands of a few financiers, but was of no benefit at all to the public. A better approach would have been to give this equipment to railtrack and allow them to deal with it: they could then have used these profits to subsides track repairs.
Important note about the linked site -- it seems to me to be a scam site. There is no such thing as copyright registration in the UK, yet these people are operating a site that seems to represent itself as some kind of official registration service. Doesn't affect the information on it, just a warning that I have no idea who they are and sending your copyright work to them might not be the smartest move.
The fact that Peter Pan is a "cultural treasure" is all the more reason to let him pass into the public domain, rather than remain in the hands of a single comany that could (say) whore him out in commercials when it's running low on cash...
The condition for the extension of copyright in this case was that the copyight be donated to a charity that had come to be associated with the character (the Great Ormond Street Hospital). Click here and search for "peter pan" for more info.
See the more informative article here.
The main reasons why White LEDs are still not ready for general purpose lighting are:
Low CRI (Color Rendering Index) that means bad illumination compared to incandescent
And this discovery seems to solve that problem.
Low temperature of operation (120-150C max)
But probably not that one.
Have you ever tried an LED light? They suck!!! They do not cast nearly enough light. The light color is a disturbing and unnatural color, usually with too much blue in it.
... err ... even read the summary? This is about a new way of producing LEDs so that their colour looks more natural.
Did you
Try an LED flash light and then try a xenon Mag Light and tell me which one rocks your socks.
I have one of each here. Unfortunately, the xenon light weighs about twenty times as much due to the weight of its battery. It produces more light, but not enough more that I'm willing to forgive its shorter battery life. My LED light (which is actually a home-made one, with 24 high output LEDs in white and yellow) produces an adequate amount of light for off-road cycling, illuminating clear detail ~ 5-10 metres ahead of me, and has an 8 hour battery life from a pack of standard NiMH rechargeables.
They are NOT better.
Depends on the application. I also use LED lighting for low level lighting to leave on at night. It's perfect for this application as it has a narrow spectrum that isn't disturbing when I'm trying to sleep, but provides enough light that I am able to distinguish obstacles and move around the house without having to turn the main lights on.
Like Fluorescent, requires supporting circuitry -- doesn't plug directly into AC wiring.
You can connect LEDs directly to AC if you want. They'll flicker, but if you connect two sets in parallel but with opposite polarity, it generally isn't noticeable. You can even build a bridge rectifier from them.
You'd still need a transformer to bring the voltage down to something useful, but that's nothing like as complex as the support circuitry required for a flourescent.
Mind you, the cost of compact flourescents with integrated support circuitry has come down substantially in the last few years. I'm now able to get 9-17 W CF "bulbs" at about $1 per unit.
No, a .ini file of that kind really only defines the data. The structure of the data in this case would basically be a list containing the details of which names could have meaningful values associated with them, and perhaps some kind of restrictions on what the values could be.
:)
But the guy talking about XDR above is probably onto something.
After each player's first moves in chess, there are precisely 324 possible positions.
Err.. 400, actually. 16 possible pawn moves or 4 possible knight moves for each player gives 20x20 = 400.
</pedant>
I suspect it's because he probbly has little to do with the modability of the game; those questions will undoubtedly be asked to the dev team instead.
There are few things that the half-assed clones and Sid Meier's Civilization have in common that is not already in this:
Civilization
Are you joking?
1. The board game was developed under license from Microprose (as they were at the time).
2. The game play of the board game is *nothing* like the gameplay of the video games. FreeCiv follows the various Civ tech trees much more closely than the board game, has wonders that are identical in every way to Civ/CivII (whereas the board game wonders have substantially different effects, and are built in a rather different way), and has the same unit selection as civ (whereas the board game only has a very limited unit selection). The board game does not feature city building. The board game resolves combat in an entirely different way.
(although looking at the pictures you've linked to, that's a different board game from the one I played, it looks like it plays by the same principles... probably just an earlier version of it)
Also the half-assed clones have features that are missing in the Civ games, or have been implemented there much later (useable networked gaming, hex tilesets, etc.)
Most gamers I've discussed this with think that using hexagonal layouts for TBS games is actually inferior to square-with-diagonals like Civ, as it restricts movement to 6 directions, rather than the 8 available in Civ. While FreeCiv has network play, which was apparently added as an afterthought to the Civilization franchise, playing against computer players just doesn't work as well. Playing against FreeCiv AI on its hardest level I can easily beat it; against CivII I don't stand a chance unless I have a very lucky start. It also seems to lack a level that is as easy as Civ's easiest. I'm not familiar with any clones other than freeciv, so can't really comment on them.
It all started when he first researched Code of Laws back in '91...
You're not reading it right. It's part 'c' that's the key: it doesn't only transfer the data, it also transfers a description of how the data is structured.
Think of a relational database with the capability of copying its content to a remote server and you're on the right lines.
The first patent (5,842,213) doesn't cover all applications of XML. It might cover some, however. The most relevant claim is this one:
11. A method of transferring data in electronic form from a computer comprising the steps of:
a) organizing and storing the data in neutral form that is to be transferred;
b) organizing and storing the names, definitions and properties of the structural tags used to express the data in neutral form; and
c) transferring the data expressed in neutral form along with the names, definitions and properties of the structural tags that make up that neutral form data.
Which sounds to me like it would cover transferring XML with a schema embedded within the document, or transferring both the document and linked schema at the same time. Other uses of XML would still be allowed.
This claim is probably too general to survive reeximanation, though. It basically amounts to "transferring data and information about how the data is structured together". I'm sure somebody with a better knowledge of IT history than me can very easily name some prior art for that one.
12. The method of claim 11, wherein the names, definitions and properties of the structural tags used to express the data in neutral form are themselves treated as data and expressed in neutral form.
The schema is encoded in the same format as the data. Also a relevant claim to XML with embedded schemas. Rules out prior art that transferred data and a program that could process it together, unless the program was expressed in a similar structure to the data (LISP programs might count here).
13. The method of claim 11, further including the steps of:
a) adopting a compatible system of data typing;
b) using the system to express in neutral form both the data values of a set of information being transferred and the names, definitions, and properties of their associated structural tags; and
c) combining and transferring both the data values and the names, definitions and properties of the structural tags of the data values in a single neutral form transfer file.
I don't quite follow this one. Anyone got any ideas what it means?
14. A method of incorporating neutral form data values and the names, definitions and properties of their associated structural tags into an existing computer environment comprising the steps of:
a) comparing the names, definitions and properties of the components of the structural tags of the data values with those present in the existing environment;
b) entering a data value structural tag component name, definition and properties into the dictionary system of the existing environment if it is not already present; and
c) recording equivalency where a structural tag component in the dictionary system of the existing environment is found to be different but equivalent;
d) thereafter, adding the data values into the neutral form file of the existing environment.
Merging two XML files by combining their schema, then combining their data.
15. The method of claim 14, wherein the neutral form data values are new data values.
16. The method of claim 14, wherein the neutral form data values are transferred data values.
Different reasons why you may want to do 14.
17. The method of claim 14, further including the step of incorporating a unique authoring designator of the originating environment during the naming of components of structural tags to insure a lack of overlap between the structural components of a data value and those in the existing environment.
Could be construed to cover XML namespaces, if you read it right. This stands a chance of being novel, seeing as XML namespaces had not been implemented in '97 when the patent was filed.
The second patent seems less relevant -- it seems to relate to the same application that the first patent covered, but doesn't seem to add much to it that is relevant to XML. It is worth noting that the second is explicitly about a data serialization format, probably fairly similar in scope to the Java's java.io.Object[Out/In]putStream classes.
While technologically XML is a descendent of SGML, it's used for a substantially different goal: SGML is intended for markup of documents, XML is intended for rendering non-document structured data in a way that allows it to be processed independently of its data type.
As these patents are very clearly about data, not documents, I don't think SGML is a valid antecedent.
That doesn't mean there aren't any. ASN.1 or S-Exprs spring to mind as candidates.