NodeJS, while it's the hot new trend, isn't likely to replace PHP as it's more difficult to write, debug, and deploy
I gotta tell you, I find that hard to believe. What about JS is harder to write, debug, and deploy? JS is easier to write, it still has the same free form nature but has far fewer gotchas, and virtually all PHP programmers are already familiar with it. It's easier to debug, again, with fewer gotchas; and deployment seems to be more or less identical, just copy the file where you need it.
JS is the most obvious language to knock PHP off its perch. Ruby, Python, and Perl all are "foreign" as far as the average PHP programmer goes, and are unusual in some major way. Java and C# require a completely different type of environment, and are much stricter as languages.
Javascript is similar enough to PHP, without having the bone headed "Zero is "" is empty is null" type decisions that make PHP such a dangerous language to develop in.
I'm not sure the saving a port thing flies with any recent TVs.
Just how many HDMI ports do you need? Cable/Satellite, DVD/BD, and Roku/Chromecast/Amazon Stick/AppleTV, and...? I haven't seen a TV in a long while with fewer than three HDMI ports, with an additional DVI if you need it, and a suite of analog (Component, VGA, and RCA) ports.
And that's assuming you use the TV's audio. If you have a modern receiver, you'll probably plug everything into the receiver instead, which usually has far more than three HDMI ports.
At best, if you're going to get a smart TV, at least get one with neutral third party firmware like Roku, so you're not at the mercy of content providers who'd rather not produce eleventeen different apps for just as many platforms.
GWT was supposed to solve the same problem (by replacing JS with Java at the Interface Layer.) Was it too limited or was it just people don't like Java very much?
Still amazed, unfortunately, at the popularity of PHP. I hope the article's right, at least in that some of the PHP is slowly being replaced with JS.
Possibly, possibly not, but legally trying to copy the OS without some sort of license is a gray area, even if it's recreating it from documentation. That's the problem.
I wouldn't have time;-) But if I did, and the money to afford a team of people to work on it, some of what I would do would include: rewriting most of it in a memory safe language, and using this as the basis of a security system (code couldn't get run unless written in a memory safe language, perhaps using intermediate bytecode as a distribution format); adding the higher level security, adding full networking; replacing {graphics/layers}.library with something more in keeping with modern graphics hardware and replace intuition.library with something reflecting both the changed underpinnings and more modern UI requirements.
Lower priority but still necessary would probably include more efficient file system handlers. I don't know what 3.1 has, but I know just opening and closing a file took approximately a second on my old 500+.
That would leave you with an operating system that has AmigaOS's architecture and all of the advantages of its architecture, but with enough security to survive on the Internet without being owned or crashed.
I wouldn't say that, but 25 years for rigging a lottery, when rape has been known to get a six month sentence and an apparently tearful statement from a judge upset about the damage he's doing to the rapist's life, seems... excessive. Even if he "might" be released after four years on parole it still seems ludicrously high.
I get that white collar crimes are often underrated, but did this hacker actually ruin anyone's life? He didn't steal people's homes, he didn't wipe out anyone's life savings, hell he didn't even make people less likely to buy the official Blu-ray version of a movie, he just interfered with a gambling game to change who'd win it.
AROS is a clone, it's rewritten in the sense that the code isn't a copy, but it's ultimately trying to implement the exact same operating system, in the same programming languages (more or less.)
It seems like the cleverest thing to do is to just support AROS.
Leaving aside that leaves you with a clone of AmigaOS, with all of the problems of the latter, rather than a next generation operating system that uses AmigaOS's basic structures and concepts, that doesn't address the last part of the sentence you quoted.
Regardless: I'm not looking for a clone of AmigaOS, or even AmigaOS, I'm looking for the basic concepts to be used as the basis of a modern operating system. Until the legal issues are resolved, that's impossible.
No, this is network management. Network Neutrality is normally, and usefully, described as discrimination against the source (or destination) of data.
What Verizon is doing is not discriminating against source, it's managing data under a particular protocol. The battle for all protocols to be treated equally was lost a long time ago when most ISPs stopped allowing customers to receive data on port 25.
But we can't invest in trains in the US because trains aren't profitable! (Ignores all trains that are profitable, including, uh, the Acela Express, and the vast majority of high speed systems world wide)
If the summary is correct, essentially they're arguing that Google's market success means
...nothing. This has nothing to do with Google's market success. It has to do with the extent to which "to google something" has entered the public consciousness. It's perfectly possible to fail to make much headway in the market, and yet have your name become a byword for something, it's just less likely.
There are very few people from that era that are talking about it, but Woz himself is the source for the speculation that it was too hard for Atari to understand (and he felt it shouldn't have been.)
Once you understand it, it's very easy because there's so few parts, it's easier to understand. But they had trouble understanding it. So maybe some engineer there was trying to make some kind of modification to it, slight modification, and by not even understanding, who knows what part of that they mean. Was it my vertical horizontal counters or something else? If they don't understand it, that was the problem. They never called me.
AmigaOS 4 is essentially an evolved version of AmigaOS. I don't think AmigaOS can really evolve into an operating system viable for an era of modern networking.
What I'd like to see is for people to look at it, say "Reverse compatibility be damned!", and rewrite it significantly without having to worry that because they copied the basic structure, some generic legal firm that currently owns the rights can sue the pants off of them.
AmigaOS was immensely efficient, but some of that efficiency was at the expense of security. We can probably keep that by adopting, say, a managed code or a software implemented capability architecture, but that will involve being able to rewrite significant amounts of the code.
I'd love AmigaOS to be the starting point of a next generation operating system, but unless the shackles are removed, that's not going to happen. Instead something inferior has to be used as the basis, or a whole new unfamiliar system with no tested legacy built from scratch.
Nope. The FBI's recommendation has absolutely no legal force. Any company that takes its advice does so voluntarily.
Further, the FBI isn't targeting all Russian security companies, just one high profile company. And despite the "Fake News" trolls coming out in the comments here, there's been serious doubts expressed about Kaspersky ever since Putin's control over the company increased after he started attacking their management in Russia, including arresting and charging the company's computer incidents investigation team leader for treason.
There's at least good reasons to believe Kaspersky 2016-17 is a very different company to the highly respected security company that uncovered Stuxnet et al prior to 2016. Kaspersky Labs today is under the thumb of a foreign power that's not exactly in tune with US interests. The FBI warning seems reasonable to me.
Probably the most amazing operating system I've ever used, albeit very long in the tooth today. There's an open source clone, AROS, but I'd love to see the real thing open sourced, removing all the legal questions once and for all and allowing people to fork it and move it forward.
The fragmentation issue has been dead now for several years if that's what you're complaining about. Yes, few phones have the latest version, but:
- Google has ensured all 4.x+ versions of Android have a common, full, API all programmers can code for.
- Google pushes out security updates at every level for them.
What are you missing by not having O on your cheap 2+ year old phone? The new features and UI of O, and nothing else. You still end up with the same apps, and the same level of security.
Whether Flash or HTML5 video, browsers could implement identical controls
But they don't. They don't feel the need to. That's the point. I even made it above.
They refuse to on two grounds: that there's no compelling security reason to, and that it would break the web standards they signed up to. The standards applying to how you included a plug-in were always somewhat vague and Mozilla et al were able to comfortably implement click to play.
Why don't they do it for video? Because they can't without breaking the standards. Because there are websites like Youtube that break if you disable autoplaying video.
So they don't. So we're in a worse situation than we were before. You can say "Oh, but that shouldn't be the case, there's no technic..." let me stop you there, the REALITY, the actual situation we're in, is that browsers do not let users control when videos load and start, because HTML5 video turns out to be a worse standard than Flash.
One of Breitbart's most senior editor just tweeted #WAR, suggesting the publication isn't happy about Bannon's firing, and there's rather a lot of speculation on Twitter that it's about to do a 180 and oppose Trump.
So... my advice, BUY ConAgra stock, they own Orville Redenbacher's. Also BUY Diamond Foods, who own "Pop Secret!"
I think everyone knows they are limited in their effectiveness. The concept of watermarking as a major security system was addressed in the early 2000s when the music publishers started asking for help producing an audio equivalent. Their idea was they could kill piracy by, instead of encrypting music, placing watermarks on it instead that would be detected by operating systems, CD burners, etc, which would in turn refuse to copy that music.
It failed for a couple of reasons, one of which was the logistical problems associated with getting hardware and OS makers to actually cripple their hardware that way. But the other was that it was too damned hard to produce a watermark that couldn't be easily removed.
The idea has cropped up since, and I think it's even in limited use in one of the many DRMish schemes we see used everywhere on video, but nobody's relying on it because they know it's easy to remove.
Which has left groups like Shutterstock, who place it on knowing it's easy to take off, but figuring it's awkward enough that most people will just pay money for a legal, unmarked, copy.
It has elements of truth but is ultimately fundamentally wrong, the element of truth being Wozniak designed a device that implemented the game (it was all TTL circuits), based upon a concept by Bushnell. Somewhat infamously, Jobs handled the contract with Atari to do this, and told Wozniak it was for far less money than it actually was.
However, critically:
- Wozniak didn't come up with the idea of the game, he implemented a specification written by Bushnell.
- Woz's design actually wasn't comprehensible to Atari. I don't mean it didn't work, I just mean they felt they couldn't build it because they didn't understand it. So they ended up chucking out his design and reimplementing it from scratch.
So... so much for that. Now, about C3PO's silver leg...
1984? Atari went through some upheavals around then but under Tramiel continued to produce some decent hardware until the mid-nineties. The Atari ST range wasn't bad (even if the Amiga was a hundred times better), and Atari's Transputer based workstation, and on the other side, early 1990s 64 bit games consoles, were radical and interesting, at least as interesting as the Atari 8 bit home computers were before 1984 (which similarly made little impact on the market, but were loved by their owners.)
Throughout Atari's life, only their arcade business and the 2600 were massively popular. Remove those, and the 1984-1994 period looks pretty much identical to their pre-1984 period, mostly commercially successful, producing interesting hardware. They died because after the death of Commodore nobody was keen on tying themselves to non-standard proprietary computers any more in the personal computing market, and because Nintendo and Sega were better at getting their consoles into people's hands than they were.
So, now we've migrated from Flash (boo!) to HTML5 multimedia...
- Every site wants to include video, no matter how inappropriate
- Every site wants the video to autoplay
- Every site wants it to be as intrusive and distracting as possible, impossible to scroll past and ignore
I've been worrying for a while we made a mistake in demonizing Flash. You see, Flash you could just disable. Because it was a security risk, there were a hundred browser extensions and features making it easy to block Flash on a case-by-case basis.
But video? Mozilla won't even provide a UI to allow you to disable autoplay, and if you do disable it via about:config, it's an all-sites-or-nothing thing. I've actually switched to using Firefox to browse the web, and Chrome to view videos if I find one I want to watch.
This is horrible. Do I want Flash back? The worst part of that question is: I don't know. I really don't know. Between the abuse of video, and the introduction of non-standards for DRM by the W3C effectively closing the web, I think Flash was better.
I eat at a lot of restaurants and have yet to see a correlation between "good" and "popular". Red Lobster has long waiting times, but so does the (actually pretty good) Longhorn. TGI Fridays always had long waits at busy times, and so does Duffy's and the other generic "Irish" (lolwut?) restaurants we have around here, and every restaurant I've mentioned with the exception of Longhorn is awful, just awful.
You know what usually results in a line? Being a chain restaurant. That's it. That's the criteria. The chainier it gets, the longer the line is on a Saturday night. And while some chain restaurants are decent, so many are utter garbage.
It literally would not enter my criteria for "might be better than the one next to it" if of two unknown restaurants one had a line and the other didn't. I'd check the menu, and if both seem equally likely to be good, go to the less busy one on the grounds that I hate waiting.
Your argument appears to make logical sense, but it ignores experience, and unless someone has never been to a restaurant in their life, they're going to know that long waits mean zip.
Yes, I think watered down is the right term. While he's promoted violence against protesters, threatened to jail opponents, refused to accept the results of the election even after he won it - and is making plans to disenfranchise large segments of the population; while he has scapegoated vulnerable minorities including blacks, muslims, and hispanics, and promoted hatred against them, and while he has indicated support for neo-nazi groups, and included at least two people with links to neo-nazi groups in his staff, he has not yet promoted wars of aggression or murdered those groups he's scapegoating.
So yes, I would strongly advise using the term "watered down" at this time.
Also this is covered extensively in the book "SJWs and Feminists? Am I right? Right?" by Milo "Account suspended" Yiannocannohavotwitto. He comments extensively on the subject here.
Slashdot Mirror
I gotta tell you, I find that hard to believe. What about JS is harder to write, debug, and deploy? JS is easier to write, it still has the same free form nature but has far fewer gotchas, and virtually all PHP programmers are already familiar with it. It's easier to debug, again, with fewer gotchas; and deployment seems to be more or less identical, just copy the file where you need it.
JS is the most obvious language to knock PHP off its perch. Ruby, Python, and Perl all are "foreign" as far as the average PHP programmer goes, and are unusual in some major way. Java and C# require a completely different type of environment, and are much stricter as languages.
Javascript is similar enough to PHP, without having the bone headed "Zero is "" is empty is null" type decisions that make PHP such a dangerous language to develop in.
I'm not sure the saving a port thing flies with any recent TVs.
Just how many HDMI ports do you need? Cable/Satellite, DVD/BD, and Roku/Chromecast/Amazon Stick/AppleTV, and...? I haven't seen a TV in a long while with fewer than three HDMI ports, with an additional DVI if you need it, and a suite of analog (Component, VGA, and RCA) ports.
And that's assuming you use the TV's audio. If you have a modern receiver, you'll probably plug everything into the receiver instead, which usually has far more than three HDMI ports.
At best, if you're going to get a smart TV, at least get one with neutral third party firmware like Roku, so you're not at the mercy of content providers who'd rather not produce eleventeen different apps for just as many platforms.
GWT was supposed to solve the same problem (by replacing JS with Java at the Interface Layer.) Was it too limited or was it just people don't like Java very much?
Still amazed, unfortunately, at the popularity of PHP. I hope the article's right, at least in that some of the PHP is slowly being replaced with JS.
Possibly, possibly not, but legally trying to copy the OS without some sort of license is a gray area, even if it's recreating it from documentation. That's the problem.
I wouldn't have time ;-) But if I did, and the money to afford a team of people to work on it, some of what I would do would include: rewriting most of it in a memory safe language, and using this as the basis of a security system (code couldn't get run unless written in a memory safe language, perhaps using intermediate bytecode as a distribution format); adding the higher level security, adding full networking; replacing {graphics/layers}.library with something more in keeping with modern graphics hardware and replace intuition.library with something reflecting both the changed underpinnings and more modern UI requirements.
Lower priority but still necessary would probably include more efficient file system handlers. I don't know what 3.1 has, but I know just opening and closing a file took approximately a second on my old 500+.
That would leave you with an operating system that has AmigaOS's architecture and all of the advantages of its architecture, but with enough security to survive on the Internet without being owned or crashed.
I wouldn't say that, but 25 years for rigging a lottery, when rape has been known to get a six month sentence and an apparently tearful statement from a judge upset about the damage he's doing to the rapist's life, seems... excessive. Even if he "might" be released after four years on parole it still seems ludicrously high.
I get that white collar crimes are often underrated, but did this hacker actually ruin anyone's life? He didn't steal people's homes, he didn't wipe out anyone's life savings, hell he didn't even make people less likely to buy the official Blu-ray version of a movie, he just interfered with a gambling game to change who'd win it.
25 years for that? That's absurd.
AROS is a clone, it's rewritten in the sense that the code isn't a copy, but it's ultimately trying to implement the exact same operating system, in the same programming languages (more or less.)
Leaving aside that leaves you with a clone of AmigaOS, with all of the problems of the latter, rather than a next generation operating system that uses AmigaOS's basic structures and concepts, that doesn't address the last part of the sentence you quoted.
Regardless: I'm not looking for a clone of AmigaOS, or even AmigaOS, I'm looking for the basic concepts to be used as the basis of a modern operating system. Until the legal issues are resolved, that's impossible.
No, this is network management. Network Neutrality is normally, and usefully, described as discrimination against the source (or destination) of data.
What Verizon is doing is not discriminating against source, it's managing data under a particular protocol. The battle for all protocols to be treated equally was lost a long time ago when most ISPs stopped allowing customers to receive data on port 25.
But we can't invest in trains in the US because trains aren't profitable! (Ignores all trains that are profitable, including, uh, the Acela Express, and the vast majority of high speed systems world wide)
source
AmigaOS 4 is essentially an evolved version of AmigaOS. I don't think AmigaOS can really evolve into an operating system viable for an era of modern networking.
What I'd like to see is for people to look at it, say "Reverse compatibility be damned!", and rewrite it significantly without having to worry that because they copied the basic structure, some generic legal firm that currently owns the rights can sue the pants off of them.
AmigaOS was immensely efficient, but some of that efficiency was at the expense of security. We can probably keep that by adopting, say, a managed code or a software implemented capability architecture, but that will involve being able to rewrite significant amounts of the code.
I'd love AmigaOS to be the starting point of a next generation operating system, but unless the shackles are removed, that's not going to happen. Instead something inferior has to be used as the basis, or a whole new unfamiliar system with no tested legacy built from scratch.
Nope. The FBI's recommendation has absolutely no legal force. Any company that takes its advice does so voluntarily.
Further, the FBI isn't targeting all Russian security companies, just one high profile company. And despite the "Fake News" trolls coming out in the comments here, there's been serious doubts expressed about Kaspersky ever since Putin's control over the company increased after he started attacking their management in Russia, including arresting and charging the company's computer incidents investigation team leader for treason.
There's at least good reasons to believe Kaspersky 2016-17 is a very different company to the highly respected security company that uncovered Stuxnet et al prior to 2016. Kaspersky Labs today is under the thumb of a foreign power that's not exactly in tune with US interests. The FBI warning seems reasonable to me.
Probably the most amazing operating system I've ever used, albeit very long in the tooth today. There's an open source clone, AROS, but I'd love to see the real thing open sourced, removing all the legal questions once and for all and allowing people to fork it and move it forward.
The fragmentation issue has been dead now for several years if that's what you're complaining about. Yes, few phones have the latest version, but:
- Google has ensured all 4.x+ versions of Android have a common, full, API all programmers can code for.
- Google pushes out security updates at every level for them.
What are you missing by not having O on your cheap 2+ year old phone? The new features and UI of O, and nothing else. You still end up with the same apps, and the same level of security.
But they don't. They don't feel the need to. That's the point. I even made it above.
They refuse to on two grounds: that there's no compelling security reason to, and that it would break the web standards they signed up to. The standards applying to how you included a plug-in were always somewhat vague and Mozilla et al were able to comfortably implement click to play.
Why don't they do it for video? Because they can't without breaking the standards. Because there are websites like Youtube that break if you disable autoplaying video.
So they don't. So we're in a worse situation than we were before. You can say "Oh, but that shouldn't be the case, there's no technic..." let me stop you there, the REALITY, the actual situation we're in, is that browsers do not let users control when videos load and start, because HTML5 video turns out to be a worse standard than Flash.
It didn't have to be.
But it ended up being one.
One of Breitbart's most senior editor just tweeted #WAR, suggesting the publication isn't happy about Bannon's firing, and there's rather a lot of speculation on Twitter that it's about to do a 180 and oppose Trump.
So... my advice, BUY ConAgra stock, they own Orville Redenbacher's. Also BUY Diamond Foods, who own "Pop Secret!"
And you probably want to buy some popcorn too.
I think everyone knows they are limited in their effectiveness. The concept of watermarking as a major security system was addressed in the early 2000s when the music publishers started asking for help producing an audio equivalent. Their idea was they could kill piracy by, instead of encrypting music, placing watermarks on it instead that would be detected by operating systems, CD burners, etc, which would in turn refuse to copy that music.
It failed for a couple of reasons, one of which was the logistical problems associated with getting hardware and OS makers to actually cripple their hardware that way. But the other was that it was too damned hard to produce a watermark that couldn't be easily removed.
The idea has cropped up since, and I think it's even in limited use in one of the many DRMish schemes we see used everywhere on video, but nobody's relying on it because they know it's easy to remove.
Which has left groups like Shutterstock, who place it on knowing it's easy to take off, but figuring it's awkward enough that most people will just pay money for a legal, unmarked, copy.
It has elements of truth but is ultimately fundamentally wrong, the element of truth being Wozniak designed a device that implemented the game (it was all TTL circuits), based upon a concept by Bushnell. Somewhat infamously, Jobs handled the contract with Atari to do this, and told Wozniak it was for far less money than it actually was.
However, critically:
- Wozniak didn't come up with the idea of the game, he implemented a specification written by Bushnell.
- Woz's design actually wasn't comprehensible to Atari. I don't mean it didn't work, I just mean they felt they couldn't build it because they didn't understand it. So they ended up chucking out his design and reimplementing it from scratch.
So... so much for that. Now, about C3PO's silver leg...
1984? Atari went through some upheavals around then but under Tramiel continued to produce some decent hardware until the mid-nineties. The Atari ST range wasn't bad (even if the Amiga was a hundred times better), and Atari's Transputer based workstation, and on the other side, early 1990s 64 bit games consoles, were radical and interesting, at least as interesting as the Atari 8 bit home computers were before 1984 (which similarly made little impact on the market, but were loved by their owners.)
Throughout Atari's life, only their arcade business and the 2600 were massively popular. Remove those, and the 1984-1994 period looks pretty much identical to their pre-1984 period, mostly commercially successful, producing interesting hardware. They died because after the death of Commodore nobody was keen on tying themselves to non-standard proprietary computers any more in the personal computing market, and because Nintendo and Sega were better at getting their consoles into people's hands than they were.
So, now we've migrated from Flash (boo!) to HTML5 multimedia...
- Every site wants to include video, no matter how inappropriate
- Every site wants the video to autoplay
- Every site wants it to be as intrusive and distracting as possible, impossible to scroll past and ignore
I've been worrying for a while we made a mistake in demonizing Flash. You see, Flash you could just disable. Because it was a security risk, there were a hundred browser extensions and features making it easy to block Flash on a case-by-case basis.
But video? Mozilla won't even provide a UI to allow you to disable autoplay, and if you do disable it via about:config, it's an all-sites-or-nothing thing. I've actually switched to using Firefox to browse the web, and Chrome to view videos if I find one I want to watch.
This is horrible. Do I want Flash back? The worst part of that question is: I don't know. I really don't know. Between the abuse of video, and the introduction of non-standards for DRM by the W3C effectively closing the web, I think Flash was better.
This is good news for Bitcoin.
I eat at a lot of restaurants and have yet to see a correlation between "good" and "popular". Red Lobster has long waiting times, but so does the (actually pretty good) Longhorn. TGI Fridays always had long waits at busy times, and so does Duffy's and the other generic "Irish" (lolwut?) restaurants we have around here, and every restaurant I've mentioned with the exception of Longhorn is awful, just awful.
You know what usually results in a line? Being a chain restaurant. That's it. That's the criteria. The chainier it gets, the longer the line is on a Saturday night. And while some chain restaurants are decent, so many are utter garbage.
It literally would not enter my criteria for "might be better than the one next to it" if of two unknown restaurants one had a line and the other didn't. I'd check the menu, and if both seem equally likely to be good, go to the less busy one on the grounds that I hate waiting.
Your argument appears to make logical sense, but it ignores experience, and unless someone has never been to a restaurant in their life, they're going to know that long waits mean zip.
Yes, I think watered down is the right term. While he's promoted violence against protesters, threatened to jail opponents, refused to accept the results of the election even after he won it - and is making plans to disenfranchise large segments of the population; while he has scapegoated vulnerable minorities including blacks, muslims, and hispanics, and promoted hatred against them, and while he has indicated support for neo-nazi groups, and included at least two people with links to neo-nazi groups in his staff, he has not yet promoted wars of aggression or murdered those groups he's scapegoating.
So yes, I would strongly advise using the term "watered down" at this time.
I believe he is referring to the excellent and well researched Youtube videos:
FEMINISTS BUSTED11!! - by unpcgamer82
Sarkeesian - EXPOSED! - by CARLOFSWINDON772
SJWS REVEALED!!! - by nogirlsallowed81
Also this is covered extensively in the book "SJWs and Feminists? Am I right? Right?" by Milo "Account suspended" Yiannocannohavotwitto. He comments extensively on the subject here.