Night-Vision Goggles? You know, it's bad enough that the movie industry is going bankrupt, but now, thanks to rampant piracy, I won't be able to sneak in a bag of gummi bears! Oh, the humanity!
Microsoft intentionally extended the core API by introducing additional instructions to access the underlying Win32 operating system. Had they done this by providing a separate API, there would not have been any problems.
Unfortunately, Microsoft chose to take a different approach and introduced new operators into the core byte-code interpreted by the Virtual Machine. As these additional instructions were only valid within Microsoft's version, users were effectively left with no choice but to use the exact VM for which the code was compiled. This decision by Microsoft to modify the base instruction set of the Java language made it impossible to port code from one platform to another, thereby ensuring that users would have to remain on the Windows platform. In fact, Java programs compiled for MS's VM would not even work on the same OS if another vendor's VM was used to run it. This is why some applets wouldn't work with the JVM shipped with Netscape (which was Sun's JVM).
The instruction set supported by a Java VM is determined and maintained by Sun. In order to implement your own VM, you must agree to a license with Sun stating that you will not modify the core instruction set. In adding direct support for OS access (such as formatting a hard drive), Microsoft violated this license agreement. Microsoft also added their own keywords to the core language (delegate and multicast) which further ensured incompatibility.
The Java byte code is a single byte in size and, as a result, the Java VM spec supports up to 256 op codes. Not all of them are used, however. Out of those potential 256 opcodes, only 200 valid operators are specified. Opcode 186 is not used, opcode 201 is used for debugging, and codes 254 and 255 are used for trapping and tracing. The remaining opcodes are reserved for future use. Clearly, if a compiler introduces new opcodes, the other compilers won't know about them and won't be able to run programs built with those opcodes. This is in direct violation of the VM specification and is exactly what Microsoft did. This was the basis for the Sun v. Microsoft lawsuit, for which Microsoft was found in willful violation.
So, it would seem as if Microsoft did intentionally break their own version of Java.
Yahoo only charges a fee for commercial business sites. The fee is part of their express listing service which expidites the addition of the submitted site. Non-commercial sites are still listed for free through their standard submission process.
It'll be nice to have a utility that will actually make it work, rather than my forgetting that Opera (and Mozilla) is the only application "modern" enough to include gestures.
You didn't miss much. The whole trailer looks pretty generic. They don't explain who the "League" is (B-Grade, classic literary characters turned superheroes), not even naming them. And what's with this "LXG" crap?
One more thing to add. The person that you so gleefully dumped on because he was "so dreadfully out of touch as to not know the basic plot of LOTR", as a direct result of your actions, may very well never read the books now. While you might sit on high with a smug attitude of your literary prowess (and believe me sir, it is a delusion), have you given the slightest thought to ask whether the person that you have turned away from reading, in your own words, such an important work, was under the age of 25? Have they yet to have the opportunity to read the series? Was the movie their first introduction to the works of Tolkein which, prior, had garnered little attention as of late? Bakshi not included. It's not commonly included in the school curriculums.
My apologies to the rest of the readers here but, all too often we see this sort of garbage. Smug, anti-social (and invariably misplaced and unearned), elitist attitudes that turn away anyone foolish enough to enter into your small, tightly-guarded domain of self-importance and self-loathing. I almost have to wonder if your comments were made for no other reason than to elicit a reaction such as this one. Look! Someone has acknowledged my existance!
You think that you have made a brilliant contribution to the discourse contained herein. Instead, you have merely succeeded in making an ass of yourself and possibly turning off someone from enjoying the very same writings that you hold so dear and foolishly take for granted. Not to mention wasting the past ten minutes of *my* life.
I have never flamed someone in a public forum and I am typically very tolerant of people's opinions, but this kind of bullshit just really gets under my skin.
And to think - I gave up my mod points in this thread to take this bait. I should have just marked you as a troll.
Just to be clear: You are an ass. An immature and inconsiderate one at that.
While it might not be much of a surprise how the book ends in the general sense (good triumphs over evil and there was much rejoicing), it is wholly unnecessary for you to spell out exactly how it happens.
While it may seem incredulous to you, it is entirely possible that someone has not read LOTR. And to say that it was "one of the most important pieces of western fiction written in the 20th century" just belies your lack of a literary education and maturity. "Influential"? Without a doubt. "Important"? C'mon. Tolkein may have poored his life into the work, a noble act to be sure, but he never deluded himself into thinking that his writings were of significant importance to the literary world. At least, he had not conveyed that attitude in any of the interviews that he had given that I had personally read -- and I did my thesis work on him.
OoOoOoOoh, lookie! Flamebait! From an AC, too! Bonus!
Anyone who actually bothered to read my comment should have no difficulty in coming to the conclusion that it was, in fact, not an endorsement of Bonzi's deceptive practices, but merely a respone to the overall statement that employing someone hurts the economy.
Please don't interpret this reply as a validation of your opinion. If you can't stand behind your remark, why should the rest of us?
I must have fallen asleep that day in my Economics class, because I don't understand your argument. If anything, Bonzi is helping the economy by employing those people. If they weren't working at Bonzi, they would be part of the pool of people who are competing for other jobs and contributing less money to the overall economy. Quite the opposite, Bonzi is employing people who, in turn, use their salaries to buy other things, thereby putting money back into the economic system, thus helping the economy.
If you want to argue their liability on the basis of deceptive advertising, that's one thing. But please don't suggest that they are negatively affecting the economy.
Wow, did you ever miss out on a free marketing opportunity. If you have a web site that is unique among the billions of web sites out there, I would have liked to learn more about it. It's a shame that you didn't put a URL in your post.
All sarcasm aside, you make some valid points and, if I was moderating today, I would have modded you up as Informative +1. Hopefully someone else will.
It's good to have some insight from a site owner regarding their advertising methods and the reasons for choosing said methods. I also find it interesting that the pop-unders prooved to be 5 times more effective than the banner ads. Clearly this is a model that works for some.
The issue here isn't an attack on you as the owner. In fact, I doubt that it's an attack on the technology that is being presented here. At least for me, the issue here is that we're being labeled as thieves should we choose to ignore the advertising. This is no different from, and most likely inspired by, Jack Valenti's argument that you are a thief if you skip over a commercial while watching a video tape.
As for your business model, no one is trying to change it and, in fact, you have proof here that there is an opportunity to improve on it. Many sites sale an ad-free subcription option where, for a nominal fee, the viewer is spared the pop-up and banner ads. Those people who enjoy your web site but want to ignore the ads can pay a few bucks a month for the priviledge of not being bombarded with the ads. Those who don't want to pay can continue to receive them. This is a proven revenue model and one that you might want to consider. If nothing else, the revolving (monthly) charges should provide you with a predictable revenue stream. In fact, as you have 200,000 unique visitors a month, if a (very) small percentage sign up for the program, you'll actually end up making more money than you would with the pop-ups.
As a side-comment, I don't personally find pop-ups that bad provided that it is a single pop-up. It's when you visit a site and six of them pop-up all at once that it becomes a nuisance. That's when I tell Opera to suppress the popup windows.
Getting that $50 from your neighbor may not be as hard as you think.
Were that only true. Unfortunately, we often lose sight of the fact that our neighbors are not as techno-savvy as our friends here on/. The Internet is still a thing of great mystery to many people. Hell, *electricity* is still a thing of wonder. Getting people to understand that an alternative is available to them from the "guy next door" is a near-impossible sale. I'd probably have an easier time getting everyone to convert to wind-power than a community ISP model.
Still, I will keep my eyes open for the opportunity to help educate the masses.
Or getting legislation passed that classifies wireless networks as a form of public broadcasting and making it akin to pirate radio. I seem to recall that the community ISP in Colorado, Ruby Ranch, had a number of problems issues with Qwest, et. al. Also, in that post is mention of how the FCC is trying to alter the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that might make a community ISP all but impossible. So, this sort of legal "forcasting" isn't all that far-fetched.
I live in a "ruralish" surburban area, in a development with 27 houses. Comcast is the only option available, not counting dial-up. Until DSL's last-mile problems are resolved, that is how it is going to stay. Although, even if I *did* have DSL, Verizon would be the provider, so I'd lose either way. Hell, I even tried to get a frational T1 from XO, but live too far away from a major city.
I would love to establish a community ISP. However, the costs, expertise and constant attention that it would require are prohibitive. To say nothing of having to convince my neighbors to join in on the fun - for the same $50 per household that they are paying now. That is also assuming that each house participated, which is not likely.
I'm eager to find an alternative or viable solution. However, walking away from the service (as has been suggested previously) is not an option. Over the last 9 years, the Internet has become an essential tool in my life, both personally and professionally. I use it more than the telephone and it is certainly more important to me than television (of which I literally watch about 1 hour a week - no...seriously.). Whining to my congressman also won't work as this is a legitimate business decision - something that Comcast (or any provider) is certainly entitled to do. And I do not see this as a result of their monopoly. Any other company is more than welcome to lay down some fiber to my house. The cable company is the only one that has actually gone ahead and done it. They deserve the exclusivity of their service. Not to venture off-topic, but I have never understood how a utility company, such as the power or telephone company, can finance and install the infrastructure for their service, and then be forced to allow other companies to use that same infrastructure. But that's a discussion for another thread, I suppose.
So, short of just "sucking it up" or "taking it" (depending on which way you're facing, I guess), what are the options?
Slashdot Mirror
Night-Vision Goggles? You know, it's bad enough that the movie industry is going bankrupt, but now, thanks to rampant piracy, I won't be able to sneak in a bag of gummi bears! Oh, the humanity!
You mean they finally figured out a way to get rid of Windows XP? =)
Microsoft intentionally extended the core API by introducing additional instructions to access the underlying Win32 operating system. Had they done this by providing a separate API, there would not have been any problems.
Unfortunately, Microsoft chose to take a different approach and introduced new operators into the core byte-code interpreted by the Virtual Machine. As these additional instructions were only valid within Microsoft's version, users were effectively left with no choice but to use the exact VM for which the code was compiled. This decision by Microsoft to modify the base instruction set of the Java language made it impossible to port code from one platform to another, thereby ensuring that users would have to remain on the Windows platform. In fact, Java programs compiled for MS's VM would not even work on the same OS if another vendor's VM was used to run it. This is why some applets wouldn't work with the JVM shipped with Netscape (which was Sun's JVM).
The instruction set supported by a Java VM is determined and maintained by Sun. In order to implement your own VM, you must agree to a license with Sun stating that you will not modify the core instruction set. In adding direct support for OS access (such as formatting a hard drive), Microsoft violated this license agreement. Microsoft also added their own keywords to the core language (delegate and multicast) which further ensured incompatibility.
The Java byte code is a single byte in size and, as a result, the Java VM spec supports up to 256 op codes. Not all of them are used, however. Out of those potential 256 opcodes, only 200 valid operators are specified. Opcode 186 is not used, opcode 201 is used for debugging, and codes 254 and 255 are used for trapping and tracing. The remaining opcodes are reserved for future use. Clearly, if a compiler introduces new opcodes, the other compilers won't know about them and won't be able to run programs built with those opcodes. This is in direct violation of the VM specification and is exactly what Microsoft did. This was the basis for the Sun v. Microsoft lawsuit, for which Microsoft was found in willful violation.
So, it would seem as if Microsoft did intentionally break their own version of Java.
If you still do not understand how Microsoft did this on purpose, I suggest that you take a look at the Java Virtual Machine Specification, as well as a nice book on general compiler theory.
I love the smell of FUD in the morning....
Yahoo only charges a fee for commercial business sites. The fee is part of their express listing service which expidites the addition of the submitted site. Non-commercial sites are still listed for free through their standard submission process.
I don't want to give Real Networks my credit card number just to download the "free" version of their player
The RealOne player is free. You tried to download the premium subscription service, which requires a credit card.
RTFM, I guess.
Adventure. Heh! Excitement. Heh! A real hacker craves not these things.
Read it many years ago - it's still relevant. The Psychology of Computer Programming - Gerald Weinberg.
Understanding programmers goes beyond merely "treating them as the professionals that they are."
A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. =)
>>He would need characters like the diplomat and the spy
Clearly, he doesn't play chess.
He plays Stratego.
Perhaps he was referring to MS Access, the binaries for which are included in the Windows distro.
How long before they start embedding these tags in other household items?
It's gonna *really* make you think twice about removing that mattress tag!
I already have a nice man who comes to my door and takes care of everything...He's called an "accountant."
I'm constantly using it outside of Opera.
It'll be nice to have a utility that will actually make it work, rather than my forgetting that Opera (and Mozilla) is the only application "modern" enough to include gestures.
You didn't miss much. The whole trailer looks pretty generic. They don't explain who the "League" is (B-Grade, classic literary characters turned superheroes), not even naming them. And what's with this "LXG" crap?
The whole trailer looks like an X-Men 2 rip-off.
Bored of the Rings?
=)
One more thing to add. The person that you so gleefully dumped on because he was "so dreadfully out of touch as to not know the basic plot of LOTR", as a direct result of your actions, may very well never read the books now. While you might sit on high with a smug attitude of your literary prowess (and believe me sir, it is a delusion), have you given the slightest thought to ask whether the person that you have turned away from reading, in your own words, such an important work, was under the age of 25? Have they yet to have the opportunity to read the series? Was the movie their first introduction to the works of Tolkein which, prior, had garnered little attention as of late? Bakshi not included. It's not commonly included in the school curriculums.
My apologies to the rest of the readers here but, all too often we see this sort of garbage. Smug, anti-social (and invariably misplaced and unearned), elitist attitudes that turn away anyone foolish enough to enter into your small, tightly-guarded domain of self-importance and self-loathing. I almost have to wonder if your comments were made for no other reason than to elicit a reaction such as this one. Look! Someone has acknowledged my existance!
You think that you have made a brilliant contribution to the discourse contained herein. Instead, you have merely succeeded in making an ass of yourself and possibly turning off someone from enjoying the very same writings that you hold so dear and foolishly take for granted. Not to mention wasting the past ten minutes of *my* life.
I have never flamed someone in a public forum and I am typically very tolerant of people's opinions, but this kind of bullshit just really gets under my skin.
And to think - I gave up my mod points in this thread to take this bait. I should have just marked you as a troll.
Just to be clear: You are an ass. An immature and inconsiderate one at that.
While it might not be much of a surprise how the book ends in the general sense (good triumphs over evil and there was much rejoicing), it is wholly unnecessary for you to spell out exactly how it happens.
While it may seem incredulous to you, it is entirely possible that someone has not read LOTR. And to say that it was "one of the most important pieces of western fiction written in the 20th century" just belies your lack of a literary education and maturity. "Influential"? Without a doubt. "Important"? C'mon. Tolkein may have poored his life into the work, a noble act to be sure, but he never deluded himself into thinking that his writings were of significant importance to the literary world. At least, he had not conveyed that attitude in any of the interviews that he had given that I had personally read -- and I did my thesis work on him.
Oh, and thanks for fscking up Citizen Kane, too.
I'm sure that thousands of people leave their keys in the ignition of their parked cars and never have their car stolen.
That doesn't make their cars any more secure.
What about ArgoUML?
OoOoOoOoh, lookie! Flamebait! From an AC, too! Bonus!
Anyone who actually bothered to read my comment should have no difficulty in coming to the conclusion that it was, in fact, not an endorsement of Bonzi's deceptive practices, but merely a respone to the overall statement that employing someone hurts the economy.
Please don't interpret this reply as a validation of your opinion. If you can't stand behind your remark, why should the rest of us?
I must have fallen asleep that day in my Economics class, because I don't understand your argument. If anything, Bonzi is helping the economy by employing those people. If they weren't working at Bonzi, they would be part of the pool of people who are competing for other jobs and contributing less money to the overall economy. Quite the opposite, Bonzi is employing people who, in turn, use their salaries to buy other things, thereby putting money back into the economic system, thus helping the economy.
If you want to argue their liability on the basis of deceptive advertising, that's one thing. But please don't suggest that they are negatively affecting the economy.
Wow, did you ever miss out on a free marketing opportunity. If you have a web site that is unique among the billions of web sites out there, I would have liked to learn more about it. It's a shame that you didn't put a URL in your post.
All sarcasm aside, you make some valid points and, if I was moderating today, I would have modded you up as Informative +1. Hopefully someone else will.
It's good to have some insight from a site owner regarding their advertising methods and the reasons for choosing said methods. I also find it interesting that the pop-unders prooved to be 5 times more effective than the banner ads. Clearly this is a model that works for some.
The issue here isn't an attack on you as the owner. In fact, I doubt that it's an attack on the technology that is being presented here. At least for me, the issue here is that we're being labeled as thieves should we choose to ignore the advertising. This is no different from, and most likely inspired by, Jack Valenti's argument that you are a thief if you skip over a commercial while watching a video tape.
As for your business model, no one is trying to change it and, in fact, you have proof here that there is an opportunity to improve on it. Many sites sale an ad-free subcription option where, for a nominal fee, the viewer is spared the pop-up and banner ads. Those people who enjoy your web site but want to ignore the ads can pay a few bucks a month for the priviledge of not being bombarded with the ads. Those who don't want to pay can continue to receive them. This is a proven revenue model and one that you might want to consider. If nothing else, the revolving (monthly) charges should provide you with a predictable revenue stream. In fact, as you have 200,000 unique visitors a month, if a (very) small percentage sign up for the program, you'll actually end up making more money than you would with the pop-ups.
As a side-comment, I don't personally find pop-ups that bad provided that it is a single pop-up. It's when you visit a site and six of them pop-up all at once that it becomes a nuisance. That's when I tell Opera to suppress the popup windows.
Perhaps in Iowa, but on the East Coast (US) it's PSE&G.
Getting that $50 from your neighbor may not be as hard as you think.
/. The Internet is still a thing of great mystery to many people. Hell, *electricity* is still a thing of wonder. Getting people to understand that an alternative is available to them from the "guy next door" is a near-impossible sale. I'd probably have an easier time getting everyone to convert to wind-power than a community ISP model.
Were that only true. Unfortunately, we often lose sight of the fact that our neighbors are not as techno-savvy as our friends here on
Still, I will keep my eyes open for the opportunity to help educate the masses.
Or getting legislation passed that classifies wireless networks as a form of public broadcasting and making it akin to pirate radio. I seem to recall that the community ISP in Colorado, Ruby Ranch, had a number of problems issues with Qwest, et. al. Also, in that post is mention of how the FCC is trying to alter the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that might make a community ISP all but impossible. So, this sort of legal "forcasting" isn't all that far-fetched.
I live in a "ruralish" surburban area, in a development with 27 houses. Comcast is the only option available, not counting dial-up. Until DSL's last-mile problems are resolved, that is how it is going to stay. Although, even if I *did* have DSL, Verizon would be the provider, so I'd lose either way. Hell, I even tried to get a frational T1 from XO, but live too far away from a major city.
I would love to establish a community ISP. However, the costs, expertise and constant attention that it would require are prohibitive. To say nothing of having to convince my neighbors to join in on the fun - for the same $50 per household that they are paying now. That is also assuming that each house participated, which is not likely.
I'm eager to find an alternative or viable solution. However, walking away from the service (as has been suggested previously) is not an option. Over the last 9 years, the Internet has become an essential tool in my life, both personally and professionally. I use it more than the telephone and it is certainly more important to me than television (of which I literally watch about 1 hour a week - no...seriously.). Whining to my congressman also won't work as this is a legitimate business decision - something that Comcast (or any provider) is certainly entitled to do. And I do not see this as a result of their monopoly. Any other company is more than welcome to lay down some fiber to my house. The cable company is the only one that has actually gone ahead and done it. They deserve the exclusivity of their service. Not to venture off-topic, but I have never understood how a utility company, such as the power or telephone company, can finance and install the infrastructure for their service, and then be forced to allow other companies to use that same infrastructure. But that's a discussion for another thread, I suppose.
So, short of just "sucking it up" or "taking it" (depending on which way you're facing, I guess), what are the options?