"Some of the best and most experienced engineers in the world are working on this," says Samit of EMI. "It's near and dear to our hearts to get this right."
I was always very happy with Internet searching, so I was surprised to see an article talking about some big Internet content crisis. I see their point about the 'surface' and the 'deep' web, but these are also the same terms used in BrightPlanet's whatepaper on the subject. Since it's pretty obvious that BrightPlanet invented the term, the entire article comes into question: why didn't they draw a distinction between the company whitepaper's thoughts and facts?
And in the fourth paragraph:
Despite the ever-ballooning size of the World Wide Web, which some experts claim is on the order of 550 billion Web pages, much of the most interesting and valuable content remains hard to find.
An unsubstantiated 550 billion pages, or about 100 pages for every living human being? I'm no expert, but that's ridiculous.
They quoted the Google people saying how hard it is to search for anything besides text, and then spruced some BrightPlanet PR. It sounds like someone's meeting the quota at Reuters, more of that fantastic deep content we should all pay for.
actice. Way more readable, and way more game oriented. The dated info is regarding VGA registers, 8086 optimizations, stuff like that. And even then, it's a good illustration of how far you have to go beyond the manual to get the best performance. The graphics stuff holds up better over time.
I was leaving the Barnes and Noble computer book section about a two years ago, and the author's name on the book stopped me. It was hidden in the graphics section next to Photoshop and Shockwave books, so a very lucky find for me!
Freenet should survive because it could replace HTTP as a file-sharing protocol. Data is replicated throughout the network, which prevents the Slashdot effect. This will enable people to publish stuff without shelling out major bux for bandwidth.
And you should also try to write your software with fewer bugs. And if you're in a boxing match, try to land more punches than the other guy.
Seriously, what kind of advice is 'use good design'? I've heard so many people spout this pretty obvious goal as wisdom, and then go on to point out that stupid solutions run slowly now matter what language you use. Given two reasonably intelligent programs, the choice of language makes a huge difference in the speed of an application.
I think the killer for amatuer sites is the cost of bandwidth, because most people can't pay for a T1 without financial support. Freenet fixes that by moving the bandwidth requirement from the producer to the consumers.
Also, P2P networks help the micropayment problem. Not exactly sure how, but it has something to do with nodes charging for services, and content providing the demand for services. Consumers pay the nodes, who are almost like ISP's in this scenario, and the node operators pay the content producers.
You might be able to pipe text utils over sockets, but that's a long way from a general programming model. CORBA is slow and a pain to use, RPC is pretty limited. Map memory over the network? In 4k chunks??? I disagree w/ most Unix apps being network transparent, but I'd love to be wrong. Is SOAP and different or better than RPC? Is there something wonderful out there that I don't know about?
I used to share the 'popular position here', but working on an electronic medical record system made me change my views. I want something that protects my privacy, and the only way to do that is through good copy protection.
No system will prevent your example of dictating personal information over the phone, but our present system already has that weakness. I'm more worried about the technology I've been working on. When we have a global database of medical records, the potential for abuse is frightening unless you are the only person who controls the data, which amounts to the same kind of copy protection the RIAA is screaming about.
Your other points of unreadable data and scuzzy corporations apply to any system.
I'm not trying to get sympathy for my position, I'm trying to point out the future of our way of thinking. And don't think I support crap like encrypted speaker wire and signed media drivers. Copy protection is bad for consumers now, but not having any will be worse in the next decade.
Copy protection is a little abstract when it applies to music or software, but what about when it's your medical record? You want the hospital ER to access your record when you show up with a broken arm, but you don't want them to store the record or send copies to other places. So in a lot of ways, your concerns with private information match the RIAA's concerns with copyrighted material.
Right now big corporations own databases of our private information, and the only way to put control back into our hands is copy protection.
What scares me is the media companies trying to make peer-to-peer networking illegal, trying to make peering into their secret decoder ring illegal. Hey guys, you can be safe without being so litigous!
Napster wasn't just a way to get illegal music, it was a highly available, high capacity filesystem. Commercial products like that usually cost a bundle and require a team of specialists to configure and maintain. I think we're gonna see applications stop using databases and start using big p2p networks.
Freenet could provide a whole new architecture for static web pages. Sites like Suck.com and OMM could insert pages to the network w/out paying for the bandwidth that their popularity demands. Which means horray for authors.
You've still got to query each peer, and a linear search like that isn't acceptable when you've got a lot of people hitting a big database.
Re-read the Freenet protocol. I think their key-affinity scheme makes it more tolerable for millions of users, and the only reason it isn't searchable (yet!) is because they have the extra requirement of plausable deniability-- you're not allowed to know what's on your machine.
Here's how it works: Each image, whether a picture or a map, is created by a series of dots. Inside the dots are a string of letters and numbers that computers read to create the image. A coded message or another image can be hidden in those letters and numbers.
They're hidden using free encryption Internet programs set up by privacy advocacy groups. The programs scramble the messages or pictures into existing images. The images can only be unlocked using a "private key," or code, selected by the recipient, experts add. Otherwise, they're impossible to see or read.
Snort. It's not just propoganda, it's poorly researched propoganda! Ohhh, those scary first amendment terrorists, ohhh
With cheap digital replication, IP stopped having much in common with phsyical objects. The only similarity now is that both ideas and physical objects take time, effort, and expertise to create. Content creators need money to make up for the time and effort they spent creating content, and copy protection is the only good way.
I put copyright material like source code, music, and movies in the 'human' category of IP. What frightens me is when things I put in the 'absolute truths' category, like alogrithms, become property. I don't mind artists owning expressions of themselves, but I do mind corporations owning the laws of mathematics and nature.
And anyways, the PC case is just a pale imitation of the new mac case. Making it translucent and fruity isn't enough, there's something special about the imacs, g4s, and ibooks. Get a clue!
But yeah, what's next? Vanity plates w/ chase lights around them, blacklight ground effects, and silkscreened gothic-font 'h4x0r' across the side?
There is, however, a new language emerging which promises to clean up the blurred boundaries of content and visual formatting, and get rid of the most flagrant horrors of HTML. If you want to see an HTML alternative, go look into XML.
XML defines document syntax, but doesn't have anything to do with 'content and visual formatting'. Sorry to see an otherwise intelligent post present this common misconception.
But not everybody has net access. Try getting online in Folkston, GA. Also, computer systems might not be more effiecient that physical ballots; we have to develop them, test them, deploy them, maintain them. Remember how long it took for ATM machines to work right?
And electronic ballots are probably easier to fake.
These guys say soul-destroying stuff like about Roberta Williams and cancer and what not. Serious? I doubt it. I think they are very self-aware people who flame for entertainment.
Btw, this is the best Jon Katz article I've seen. I've been flaming your posts for a long time as AC, Jon- too bad when I get my nick I have to post something positive! Wait, that makes me look like a pussy: dear Jon, fuk u.
The guys who wrote this article are trying to make something out of nothing: they say 'drug use is rampant in the high-tech work force', and then use some richie-rich executive as their example: if I had to do his (non-technical) job, I'd need drugs too. I don't do coke, none of my techie friends do coke. The only people I know like that are musicians.
And then they keep on pointing at how the amount of drugs seized has increased; this is shaky evidence that drug use is even on the rise, let alone on the rise in a specific part of the work force.
The body count is just starting? I PLAY QUAKE ALL FUCKING DAY YOU MORONS! Lay off the crack...
Slashdot Mirror
Wonder if you could use the graphics card on the xbox for anything useful.
But I see p2p as a high-performance, high-availability database. Look out Oracle, here comes Napster!
Keep believing, guys!
I was always very happy with Internet searching, so I was surprised to see an article talking about some big Internet content crisis. I see their point about the 'surface' and the 'deep' web, but these are also the same terms used in BrightPlanet's whatepaper on the subject. Since it's pretty obvious that BrightPlanet invented the term, the entire article comes into question: why didn't they draw a distinction between the company whitepaper's thoughts and facts?
And in the fourth paragraph:
An unsubstantiated 550 billion pages, or about 100 pages for every living human being? I'm no expert, but that's ridiculous.
They quoted the Google people saying how hard it is to search for anything besides text, and then spruced some BrightPlanet PR. It sounds like someone's meeting the quota at Reuters, more of that fantastic deep content we should all pay for.
I was leaving the Barnes and Noble computer book section about a two years ago, and the author's name on the book stopped me. It was hidden in the graphics section next to Photoshop and Shockwave books, so a very lucky find for me!
Freenet should survive because it could replace HTTP as a file-sharing protocol. Data is replicated throughout the network, which prevents the Slashdot effect. This will enable people to publish stuff without shelling out major bux for bandwidth.
Seriously, what kind of advice is 'use good design'? I've heard so many people spout this pretty obvious goal as wisdom, and then go on to point out that stupid solutions run slowly now matter what language you use. Given two reasonably intelligent programs, the choice of language makes a huge difference in the speed of an application.
Like Katz himself?
Also, P2P networks help the micropayment problem. Not exactly sure how, but it has something to do with nodes charging for services, and content providing the demand for services. Consumers pay the nodes, who are almost like ISP's in this scenario, and the node operators pay the content producers.
You might be able to pipe text utils over sockets, but that's a long way from a general programming model. CORBA is slow and a pain to use, RPC is pretty limited. Map memory over the network? In 4k chunks??? I disagree w/ most Unix apps being network transparent, but I'd love to be wrong. Is SOAP and different or better than RPC? Is there something wonderful out there that I don't know about?
No system will prevent your example of dictating personal information over the phone, but our present system already has that weakness. I'm more worried about the technology I've been working on. When we have a global database of medical records, the potential for abuse is frightening unless you are the only person who controls the data, which amounts to the same kind of copy protection the RIAA is screaming about.
Your other points of unreadable data and scuzzy corporations apply to any system.
I'm not trying to get sympathy for my position, I'm trying to point out the future of our way of thinking. And don't think I support crap like encrypted speaker wire and signed media drivers. Copy protection is bad for consumers now, but not having any will be worse in the next decade.
Right now big corporations own databases of our private information, and the only way to put control back into our hands is copy protection.
What scares me is the media companies trying to make peer-to-peer networking illegal, trying to make peering into their secret decoder ring illegal. Hey guys, you can be safe without being so litigous!
Napster wasn't just a way to get illegal music, it was a highly available, high capacity filesystem. Commercial products like that usually cost a bundle and require a team of specialists to configure and maintain. I think we're gonna see applications stop using databases and start using big p2p networks.
Freenet could provide a whole new architecture for static web pages. Sites like Suck.com and OMM could insert pages to the network w/out paying for the bandwidth that their popularity demands. Which means horray for authors.
You've still got to query each peer, and a linear search like that isn't acceptable when you've got a lot of people hitting a big database.
Re-read the Freenet protocol. I think their key-affinity scheme makes it more tolerable for millions of users, and the only reason it isn't searchable (yet!) is because they have the extra requirement of plausable deniability-- you're not allowed to know what's on your machine.
I put copyright material like source code, music, and movies in the 'human' category of IP. What frightens me is when things I put in the 'absolute truths' category, like alogrithms, become property. I don't mind artists owning expressions of themselves, but I do mind corporations owning the laws of mathematics and nature.
But yeah, what's next? Vanity plates w/ chase lights around them, blacklight ground effects, and silkscreened gothic-font 'h4x0r' across the side?
There is, however, a new language emerging which promises to clean up the blurred boundaries of content and visual formatting, and get rid of the most flagrant horrors of HTML. If you want to see an HTML alternative, go look into XML.
XML defines document syntax, but doesn't have anything to do with 'content and visual formatting'. Sorry to see an otherwise intelligent post present this common misconception.
And electronic ballots are probably easier to fake.
These guys say soul-destroying stuff like about Roberta Williams and cancer and what not. Serious? I doubt it. I think they are very self-aware people who flame for entertainment.
Btw, this is the best Jon Katz article I've seen. I've been flaming your posts for a long time as AC, Jon- too bad when I get my nick I have to post something positive! Wait, that makes me look like a pussy: dear Jon, fuk u.
And then they keep on pointing at how the amount of drugs seized has increased; this is shaky evidence that drug use is even on the rise, let alone on the rise in a specific part of the work force.
The body count is just starting? I PLAY QUAKE ALL FUCKING DAY YOU MORONS! Lay off the crack...
Sending and Receiving Concerns
When a message containing TNEF information is received by a mail client that does not understand TNEF, there are three common results:
- The plain text version of the message is received and
...
- The plain text version of the message is received and
...
- The plain text version of the message is received and
...
It always sends the plain text version, but might send some useless junk along with it. Geez you guys, get a grip...