In the big picture doesn't the future of social networking truly depend on the interopability of these social networks?
Exactly. Facebook answers two questions: what are my friends up to and who else do they know? How is that not better done with other technology? Who wants to lock into one company's platform to manage their social life?
Anyone remember Friendster? Yeah, it collapsed under the weight of its users, but long before that it stopped being interesting. Orkut had the hardware and was easier to use and its discussion group features brought something new to the table, but it never went anywhere, either.
It took "gen Y", with it's comfort with the Internet coupled with a lack of sophistication regarding it, to turn Facebook and MySpace into something enduring and popular. But they're still going to get bored with it. These things are toys, and they always will be until they can become as simple and ubiquitous as email or text messaging.
At least LinkedIn, with its focus on career networking, is actually useful for grown-ups. That *might* have a future, if they can get past the creepy spammer vibe to the whole thing.
How does the third-party software signing work? How does this make a Mac safer? How does it prevent malicious software developers from signing their software and making it look nice and pretty?
It gives you someone to sue, duh. Knowing who to trust and verifying the certificate chain is, of course, your responsibility.
Don't be obtuse. You don't design for security as an afterthought. Are you claiming that Apple engineers are that lazy and naive?
Well, they are, to an extent. It is obvious that they never expected the iPhone to be broken so quickly and so successfully, or for third-party applications to be so popular.
Jailbreak forced their hand. Just admit it and move on.
I mean, you get what you want, right? Now the iPhone will actually become the preeminent mobile development platform, assuming Apple doesn't get political about who is and isn't allowed to run on it.
Poppycock. They feared those who didn't own land, because their interests were not their own. Don't hide your elitism in lame, unsupported platitudes.
In case you haven't noticed, the editorial influence of slashdot isn't exactly something to brag about. Digg fails because the only people who select stories are those whose time is the last valuable. If there were an incentive system to make it worth ones while, you'd find a higher quality of moderators.
America fails because the only people with direct access to the government are those with money to throw around. The system is already gamed by special interests, but a direct vote would make it extremely difficult for special interests to exert undue weight. For every interest group that swarms the polls, its opponents would do so also.
Heh, I wondered where you've been. You guys have been sparse in all those threads about Apple screwing over the jailbreakers and unlockers and whatnot.
So that's the new spin to cover Apple's sin? Unlocking doesn't matter because of technology fragmentation?
God forbid people learn that there is no natural reason for them buy their phone from the same people selling the service. It's not like that might influence the direction of the carriers, if the neutrality of GSM caused people to resist the change to 3G.
Yes, since it's a lost cause, let's embrace the wireless future that looks like AOL and Prodigy and Minitel, and not the Internet. Technology doesn't matter, it's all about the company logo on the side.
But that isn't the point they're making. The point is he has a bigger house than you. That's why you should hate him.
I mean, really, why isn't everyone who advocates charity over the government safety net themselves taken a vow of poverty? And why isn't the left criticizing them for it? Oh, wait, because it would make them look like douches.
I know you think it's clever, but the repeating the house thing over and over, and the quoting of South Park, it makes you out to be high schoolers of average intelligence.
But they do sell unlocked phones directly to the public, so what's your freakin' problem?
Apple could do that, but they don't. As far as I know, Palm is the only other company willing to look out for the consumer in that way.
If carriers didn't lock phones, you wouldn't be able to get them at half their actual price. And Nokia is the only company in this business with more clout than the carriers themselves. Denigrate them for sleeping with the enemy all you want, but that are more responsible than anyone for making sure the mobile internet doesn't turn into AOL.
Series 60 3rd Edition is Symbian OS 9.1. Series 60 refers to the UI toolkit, not the operating system. And the Communicator-branded devices have traditionally used a different UI called Series 80.
And for all this whining about digital signing, remember that it was a direct response to all the whining about potential viruses that made it mandatory in S60 v3. There are iPhone promoters who will tell you that security is the primary justification for the closed nature of the iPhone, and in their very next breath tell you that the signing model is another drawback to S60, Windows Mobile, and BlackBerry. I'm sorry, you can't have it both ways.
Yes, it sucks for the hobbyist, but these three platforms let you generate and install developer certificates freely. And for anyone who does this commercially, the signing expense is really in time, not money. I'm glad they're doing it; what annoys me is that it is dependent on the digital certificate racket run by companies like Verisign, and being abused by carriers to cripple device capabilities.
Ah, with ample evidence that Apple is becoming more like Microsoft, you can do nothing but pour more hate on Microsoft. Maybe Apple will look better if Microsoft looks worse!
At the same time, it also looks like the OS X architecture wasn't designed from the start to accommodate open development, so providing open access now is not just a matter of "letting people in," but in making sure the system can handle it.
So what you're saying is, it's too hard for Apple's engineers?
You're a slave, groveling for his masters. Apple is playing you for a chump, and all you can do is rationalize it as for your own good.
"Oh, it's not closed, no, wait, it's only sort of closed, but wait, you don't really want it open anyway."
Make up your mind, spin-man. Do you want them to fuck you hard, or fuck you gently?
The building is over 700 years old, and its interior is well documented. What law, exactly, requires them to get permission before they model it in a videogame?
Kids these days... sheesh. They have no disrespect for whiny, illegitimate authority.
I can't help but wonder if this judge (a Clinton appointee) made a ruling based on his true conscience and understanding of Constitutional law or if the thought "gee, if I strike this down I can make the Republicans look bad" crossed his mind, even if only for an instant.
That's absurd. It is obvious that he is part of a terrorist sleeper cell, and he ruled this way because he hates our freedoms.
Please, let's keep the word "libertarian" reserved for people who share a quite distinct point of view. Don't use it as a refugee camp for those not happy with their parent's political party.
I am a member of the Libertarian People's Front. You People's Front of Liberty swine all deserve to die!
The reason "nerds" like the Libertarian party is that they tend to prefer simplistic models to reality. Black and white thinking creates all-or-nothing ideologies.
Slashdot Mirror
Web 2.0 shot me, murdered my family and left me for dead in our burning home. I will never sleep until I have revenge on Web 2.0.
please do not try to debate me on either GW or Iraq
Down-modding just because you disagree is against the moderator guidelines. Why not post a reply, instead?
I can never tell if this sort of thing is irony or hypocrisy. We need a new word for this - hyporonicrisy. The "oron" in the middle is a coincidence.
In the big picture doesn't the future of social networking truly depend on the interopability of these social networks?
Exactly. Facebook answers two questions: what are my friends up to and who else do they know? How is that not better done with other technology? Who wants to lock into one company's platform to manage their social life?
Anyone remember Friendster? Yeah, it collapsed under the weight of its users, but long before that it stopped being interesting. Orkut had the hardware and was easier to use and its discussion group features brought something new to the table, but it never went anywhere, either.
It took "gen Y", with it's comfort with the Internet coupled with a lack of sophistication regarding it, to turn Facebook and MySpace into something enduring and popular. But they're still going to get bored with it. These things are toys, and they always will be until they can become as simple and ubiquitous as email or text messaging.
At least LinkedIn, with its focus on career networking, is actually useful for grown-ups. That *might* have a future, if they can get past the creepy spammer vibe to the whole thing.
How does the third-party software signing work? How does this make a Mac safer? How does it prevent malicious software developers from signing their software and making it look nice and pretty?
It gives you someone to sue, duh. Knowing who to trust and verifying the certificate chain is, of course, your responsibility.
Don't be obtuse. You don't design for security as an afterthought. Are you claiming that Apple engineers are that lazy and naive?
Well, they are, to an extent. It is obvious that they never expected the iPhone to be broken so quickly and so successfully, or for third-party applications to be so popular.
Jailbreak forced their hand. Just admit it and move on.
I mean, you get what you want, right? Now the iPhone will actually become the preeminent mobile development platform, assuming Apple doesn't get political about who is and isn't allowed to run on it.
Poppycock. They feared those who didn't own land, because their interests were not their own. Don't hide your elitism in lame, unsupported platitudes.
In case you haven't noticed, the editorial influence of slashdot isn't exactly something to brag about. Digg fails because the only people who select stories are those whose time is the last valuable. If there were an incentive system to make it worth ones while, you'd find a higher quality of moderators.
America fails because the only people with direct access to the government are those with money to throw around. The system is already gamed by special interests, but a direct vote would make it extremely difficult for special interests to exert undue weight. For every interest group that swarms the polls, its opponents would do so also.
Heh, I wondered where you've been. You guys have been sparse in all those threads about Apple screwing over the jailbreakers and unlockers and whatnot.
So that's the new spin to cover Apple's sin? Unlocking doesn't matter because of technology fragmentation?
God forbid people learn that there is no natural reason for them buy their phone from the same people selling the service. It's not like that might influence the direction of the carriers, if the neutrality of GSM caused people to resist the change to 3G.
Yes, since it's a lost cause, let's embrace the wireless future that looks like AOL and Prodigy and Minitel, and not the Internet. Technology doesn't matter, it's all about the company logo on the side.
But that isn't the point they're making. The point is he has a bigger house than you. That's why you should hate him.
I mean, really, why isn't everyone who advocates charity over the government safety net themselves taken a vow of poverty? And why isn't the left criticizing them for it? Oh, wait, because it would make them look like douches.
I know you think it's clever, but the repeating the house thing over and over, and the quoting of South Park, it makes you out to be high schoolers of average intelligence.
I love this meme. It's a tacit admission of defeat, it's whiny, and it's hypocritical for right-wingers to scold anyone for owning too much.
So what? I pilot mini-RC cars just fine, and in the six thousand years that the universe has existed, evolution has never invented the wheel.
But they do sell unlocked phones directly to the public, so what's your freakin' problem?
Apple could do that, but they don't. As far as I know, Palm is the only other company willing to look out for the consumer in that way.
If carriers didn't lock phones, you wouldn't be able to get them at half their actual price. And Nokia is the only company in this business with more clout than the carriers themselves. Denigrate them for sleeping with the enemy all you want, but that are more responsible than anyone for making sure the mobile internet doesn't turn into AOL.
Series 60 3rd Edition is Symbian OS 9.1. Series 60 refers to the UI toolkit, not the operating system. And the Communicator-branded devices have traditionally used a different UI called Series 80.
And for all this whining about digital signing, remember that it was a direct response to all the whining about potential viruses that made it mandatory in S60 v3. There are iPhone promoters who will tell you that security is the primary justification for the closed nature of the iPhone, and in their very next breath tell you that the signing model is another drawback to S60, Windows Mobile, and BlackBerry. I'm sorry, you can't have it both ways.
Yes, it sucks for the hobbyist, but these three platforms let you generate and install developer certificates freely. And for anyone who does this commercially, the signing expense is really in time, not money. I'm glad they're doing it; what annoys me is that it is dependent on the digital certificate racket run by companies like Verisign, and being abused by carriers to cripple device capabilities.
Ah, with ample evidence that Apple is becoming more like Microsoft, you can do nothing but pour more hate on Microsoft. Maybe Apple will look better if Microsoft looks worse!
Your brand submission is showing, zealot.
At the same time, it also looks like the OS X architecture wasn't designed from the start to accommodate open development, so providing open access now is not just a matter of "letting people in," but in making sure the system can handle it.
So what you're saying is, it's too hard for Apple's engineers?
You're a slave, groveling for his masters. Apple is playing you for a chump, and all you can do is rationalize it as for your own good.
"Oh, it's not closed, no, wait, it's only sort of closed, but wait, you don't really want it open anyway."
Make up your mind, spin-man. Do you want them to fuck you hard, or fuck you gently?
What should anyone want?
The ability to write software for the device. Then everything else will pretty much take care of itself.
The fact that they won't do that for you is all the proof you need that Apple respects the RIAA and AT&T more than its customers.
Just because stupid people abused science to secure their weakly-held position in the status hierarchy doesn't invalid those avenues of investigation.
For example, I would like to know if there is an inheritable genetic predisposition for obedience to authority. That would be quite useful.
The building is over 700 years old, and its interior is well documented. What law, exactly, requires them to get permission before they model it in a videogame?
Kids these days... sheesh. They have no disrespect for whiny, illegitimate authority.
I find it most amusing that the Atlas Shrugged-reading blogger is throwing a hissy fit because they took the word "government" out of the name.
No, there is no shortage of smart developers. That's like saying that IQ needs to be renormalized down.
What we really have is a glut of companies who want the best but aren't willing to pay for it.
It doesn't help too that many Americans view things like health care as their God-given right.
So, basically, what you're saying is that too many Americans believe in God?
Probably not true. They're going to farm the local degree mills for warm bodies who can throw code together.
I can't help but wonder if this judge (a Clinton appointee) made a ruling based on his true conscience and understanding of Constitutional law or if the thought "gee, if I strike this down I can make the Republicans look bad" crossed his mind, even if only for an instant.
That's absurd. It is obvious that he is part of a terrorist sleeper cell, and he ruled this way because he hates our freedoms.
Could you explain the time cube as well? I've been scratchin' my noggin over that one for a while.
Everyone knows that men prefer blue because it stands out against the red Martian landscape.
Women prefer pink because the thick Venusian atmosphere blocks the higher wavelengths of light.
Please, let's keep the word "libertarian" reserved for people who share a quite distinct point of view. Don't use it as a refugee camp for those not happy with their parent's political party.
I am a member of the Libertarian People's Front. You People's Front of Liberty swine all deserve to die!
The reason "nerds" like the Libertarian party is that they tend to prefer simplistic models to reality. Black and white thinking creates all-or-nothing ideologies.