Open Public:
http://openpublicapp.com/
(Open source Drupal like whitehouse.gov)
Achieve City
http://www.achievecity.com/
(SaaS version of Open Public tailored for muni)
City of DeLeon
http://www.cityofdeleon.org/
(WordPress theme developed by Luke Fretwell of GovFresh)
+100 to all the folks who said to be sure you have a long term service plan
If you happen to use multiple services then you will see the utility in bringing them all together in one place. If you don't happen to use these services then don't worry about it.
Only the term is new.
on
Ajax in Action
·
· Score: 0, Redundant
Ajax is not new. It is also not limited to JavaScript or XML. As long as scripting languages have been able to talk to embeddable controls (small "c"), one has had the ability to make calls to embedded objects that can make asynchronous transactions and return the results to web pages. My colleagues and I have been doing "AJAX" since 2001.
Reasons why there is more imagery in some places than others are probably not as cynical as one might suspect. Demand from the public and news organizations has as much to do with Iraq & Afghanistan being covered so well as do potential military concerns. The best imagery available to the public comes from commercial satellites. Some commercial stuff is better than what you can get from the government, at least w/o being in a highly classified environment. It's not that expensive to pay to have an image taken. It's even cheaper to buy and image that already exists and commercial satellites will get busy taking shots of areas that they expect to be in high demand from the paying public. Iraq & Afghanistan not withstanding, we have way more imagery data of the U.S. because there is a high commercial demand for it. Comparatively speaking, it would be much easier for terrorists to use this to target us that it would be for us or anyone to gather intelligence on potential military objectives. (Which you should absolutely, absolutely NOT construe to mean that I think we should take U.S. imagery out of the public domain.)
I don't know if a butterfly flapping it wings can cause a tornado halfway around the world, but what does a 65,000' structure protruding from our planet's surface out into space do the the universe?
By all means, please elaborate on your insinuations that I am making a living "based on fraud." I do not choose my customers' platforms. I am still required to integrate my software with their browser. I do not care what brand of browser is used and would be happy to recommend a viable alternative, only one does not exist. More often I would like to steer them clear of browsers all together. But again, that is most often not my choice to make. The utility of browsers is undeniable. Regardless of how things got this way, we are still talking literally about millions of people who deserve not to be caught in the middle of this so-called "browser war." Why must everyone take the same cop out "down with the Evil Empire" view to this situation? Is it too much to demand accountability from Mozilla or should they just be allowed to create anxiety without offering any solution? Like I've said already, you can't expect me to join your revolution if you are going to arm me with a gun that has no bullets. I was there three+ years ago. I was on board. And the whole reason I'm wasting my time with this discussion now is because I was willing to have another go at it. Ferfucksake, you take a shot at me and then go on to share your nearly identical experience - same experience I've had for the past 3+ years. Read the Mozilla plugin newsgroup today. Then hop in your Internet Wayback Machine and check out the newsgroup from, say, 2001. After three or four years people are still asking "where do I go to find out how to make a plugin?" and there is still no answer. I stand by my demands - it's long past time to put up or shut up. Either give us an alternative or help us fix what we have.
C'mon... Soure code != documentation. I've figured out how to do things by reading code more often than I care to recall. If you have, you will know that it is not fun sifting through someone else's source code to try to figure out how it works. I mean, is it too much to ask for a "How to write your own Firefox Plugin"? Go read the plugins newsgroup. I find the same questions being asked by new users that have been asked for the past 3+ years. Search throgh the comments or go to my journal and you will see what I said about my own experience in this matter.
Your assumption is incorrect and your conclusion does not follow from an accurate premise. I do not promote ActiveX as safe to use. I am introduced to customers needing web apps that will run on the computers their people use and the browsers their people run. 100% of the time that has been Windows and IE. You can wax on all you want about the justice in that, but it is what it is. Firefox may have a 2-3% market share overall, but if you recalculate that figure by taking out all the technocrats who run it for personal use, you will find that tiny percentage approaching zero. And like I said, I have no choice but to stick w/ IE, not only because it is the platform in use, but also because Mozilla offers no viable alternative. Heck, all I need is a window handle. I don't care what app is hosting it or OS it's on. If I were able to suggest Firefox as a viable alternative, I most certainly would. You want me to join the revolution, but you expect me to use a gun with no bullets.
You may be interested to know that I just sent this to Mozilla:
Hello,
I was just at the Mozilla plugins page and when I clicked on links to the NPAPI documentation I got a message that my connection to:
http://devedge.netscape.com/library/manuals/2002/p lugin/1.0/
was refused.
I was not surprised. I first wrote a plugin for Netscape 4.x about 3 1/2 years ago. It was a painful experience. The principle reason for my negative reaction was that documentation was hard to find, often incorrect, and constantly out of date. It got worse when Netscape went to LiveConnect. And now, despite years of continued development on the browser and all this new hype surrounding the Firefox release, the plugin API is still beyond reach. How can this be explained, much less tolerated? Mozilla spreads the message that ActiveX in inherently unsafe and the cause of all our web security woes, yet makes it impossible for developers to take advantage of any (alleged) alternative. Perhaps you expect that just because Firefox supports Flash, Quicktime, and Acrobat that everyone will be satisfied to use the browser. I do not think so. I would like to support Mozilla. I really, really would. But all around, Firefox continues to look and feel and act like a second-rate stand in. It certainly is not a practical alternative to IE when real work is on the table. It's time to put up or shut up. By promoting the message that ActiveX is a danger (i.e., to my customers), you are jeopardizing my ability to make a living.
The price for albums and songs just doesn't make any sense to me at all. A movie, like LOTR, might cost $100 million to make, and yet the DVD will come out - with TONS of EXTRAS - for about the same or less than the cost of most newly released albums (I saw Return of the King offered for $19.95 at my movie store, while the new Foo Fighters was $18.99 at Borders). Yet, what does it cost to produce an album? I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that it isn't anything even close to $100 million. Furthermore, a DVD released today for $20 will cost only about $10 just a few months after the initial release. Meanwhile, the Beatles White Album still costs something like $30 a full 20-some YEARS after it was released. One could argue that most of a movie's revenue is generated in theaters, and that albums don't have that same kind of outlet (concerts are significant added costs to bands & labels, while movie theater distribution probably doesn't cost movie makers much extra). But still, there are thousands of radio stations paying royalties and the cost of making an album is dramatically less than that of making movies.
Actually, the Wall Street Journal (Career Journal) just published an article about how the office is becoming too much a of a distraction. For me, it's not "things" that distract, but rather people who distract -- too many people just walking up to my desk at random and breaking my concentration.
I'm not a Python person, but...I think the issue of 20 lines versus 3 has more to do with how efficient the code is, especially once it is translated into assembly. I think the basic question you ask is a good one, but your reasons for asking seem a little off the mark. Perhaps I am misunderstanding your point about lines of code? It doesn't seem to me that the amount of typing involved has anything to do with the Java vs. Python debate.
What are the hidden costs associated with offshore outsourcing? We hear a lot about drastically lower labor costs. But there are also costs associated with cultural and geographic distance, lack of interpersonal interaction, and trust issues, and more. These should be balanced against labor cost savings. So what are these costs and how much impact do they have?
Is it really "offshore outsourcing" when the company that gets the job is a global company with offices and personnel located in the U.S.? Even jobs that are awarded to U.S. companies often involve the use of offsite workers located in or shipped in from other states. How much difference does it really make to an in-state worker who loses his job to an out-of-state worker compared to an out-of-country worker?
I like FPS wargames. I play Desert Combat. But the only realism I am concerned about is related to how things look, how vehicles perform, etc. I can't believe no one is questioning the ethics of trying promote historical understanding through a game where the main objective is essentially "shoot and kill." Framing such a game in loosely based historical context is one thing, but I doubt many FPS game developers are sufficiently qualified to teach history. Even if they are, I still say it's inappropriate. I know we want games to be realistic as possible, but when we start accepting FPS/military games packaged with (supposed) historical artifacts and political statements then we are venturing into dangerous territory, I think. I don't think I could ever even accept potential benefits, i.e., that such a game might expose players to worthwhile knowledge of an historical event, when otherwise that player may not have been presented with other opportunities for learning.
Anyway, I'm not intending to bash those game developers in Bangladesh. I'm sure their intentions are good. Bully for Bangladeshis (?) for getting into the game development mix.:^)
Once again, evidence supporting the theory that nothing is worthwhile unless it can be tied to either "product" or the military.
Imagine the art one could create.
Imagine the Emergency Broadcast System using this thing - for emergencies at night anyway;^)
Depends on how he's writing that patent. If he's patenting his system of satellites and sunlight reflectors then someone will get around it. If his patent says something like "A system for displaying light-based content in space...The preferred embodiment is to use a array of distributed satellites and sunlight reflectors..." then maybe he's trying to wrangle in on any method that would display content in space.
It's not about the patent anyway. It's about whether or not we are on our way to becoming innundated with astral advertising (and all sorts of other man-made luminations in space).
I've tried iTunes and Napster. Neither downloads MP3s. They both download wma, and iPod has those m4as. In either case, it was my observation that, in order to get mp3s, one must use a 3rd party file format converter. Of course, to do so would be a violation of the licenses for those services. Maybe there is a feature I of which I am unware and perhaps someone will tell me about it. This is inside the U.S., BTW.
Slashdot Mirror
p.s. I work for Code for America
Open Public: http://openpublicapp.com/ (Open source Drupal like whitehouse.gov) Achieve City http://www.achievecity.com/ (SaaS version of Open Public tailored for muni) City of DeLeon http://www.cityofdeleon.org/ (WordPress theme developed by Luke Fretwell of GovFresh) +100 to all the folks who said to be sure you have a long term service plan
If you happen to use multiple services then you will see the utility in bringing them all together in one place. If you don't happen to use these services then don't worry about it.
Ajax is not new. It is also not limited to JavaScript or XML. As long as scripting languages have been able to talk to embeddable controls (small "c"), one has had the ability to make calls to embedded objects that can make asynchronous transactions and return the results to web pages. My colleagues and I have been doing "AJAX" since 2001.
nasty looking icon indicating that a site was "irregular" or something like that
Maybe like a big Silver "I"? Then us Puritans can publically shun all those non-complaint developers out there living in sin.
Reasons why there is more imagery in some places than others are probably not as cynical as one might suspect. Demand from the public and news organizations has as much to do with Iraq & Afghanistan being covered so well as do potential military concerns. The best imagery available to the public comes from commercial satellites. Some commercial stuff is better than what you can get from the government, at least w/o being in a highly classified environment. It's not that expensive to pay to have an image taken. It's even cheaper to buy and image that already exists and commercial satellites will get busy taking shots of areas that they expect to be in high demand from the paying public. Iraq & Afghanistan not withstanding, we have way more imagery data of the U.S. because there is a high commercial demand for it. Comparatively speaking, it would be much easier for terrorists to use this to target us that it would be for us or anyone to gather intelligence on potential military objectives. (Which you should absolutely, absolutely NOT construe to mean that I think we should take U.S. imagery out of the public domain.)
I was basically kidding about the first part. I know it's not at simple as that, or even as accurate. :^)
I don't know if a butterfly flapping it wings can cause a tornado halfway around the world, but what does a 65,000' structure protruding from our planet's surface out into space do the the universe?
and don't go telling me to read the source code from the examples. Source != documentation.
By all means, please elaborate on your insinuations that I am making a living "based on fraud." I do not choose my customers' platforms. I am still required to integrate my software with their browser. I do not care what brand of browser is used and would be happy to recommend a viable alternative, only one does not exist. More often I would like to steer them clear of browsers all together. But again, that is most often not my choice to make. The utility of browsers is undeniable. Regardless of how things got this way, we are still talking literally about millions of people who deserve not to be caught in the middle of this so-called "browser war." Why must everyone take the same cop out "down with the Evil Empire" view to this situation? Is it too much to demand accountability from Mozilla or should they just be allowed to create anxiety without offering any solution? Like I've said already, you can't expect me to join your revolution if you are going to arm me with a gun that has no bullets. I was there three+ years ago. I was on board. And the whole reason I'm wasting my time with this discussion now is because I was willing to have another go at it. Ferfucksake, you take a shot at me and then go on to share your nearly identical experience - same experience I've had for the past 3+ years. Read the Mozilla plugin newsgroup today. Then hop in your Internet Wayback Machine and check out the newsgroup from, say, 2001. After three or four years people are still asking "where do I go to find out how to make a plugin?" and there is still no answer. I stand by my demands - it's long past time to put up or shut up. Either give us an alternative or help us fix what we have.
C'mon... Soure code != documentation. I've figured out how to do things by reading code more often than I care to recall. If you have, you will know that it is not fun sifting through someone else's source code to try to figure out how it works. I mean, is it too much to ask for a "How to write your own Firefox Plugin"? Go read the plugins newsgroup. I find the same questions being asked by new users that have been asked for the past 3+ years. Search throgh the comments or go to my journal and you will see what I said about my own experience in this matter.
Your assumption is incorrect and your conclusion does not follow from an accurate premise. I do not promote ActiveX as safe to use. I am introduced to customers needing web apps that will run on the computers their people use and the browsers their people run. 100% of the time that has been Windows and IE. You can wax on all you want about the justice in that, but it is what it is. Firefox may have a 2-3% market share overall, but if you recalculate that figure by taking out all the technocrats who run it for personal use, you will find that tiny percentage approaching zero. And like I said, I have no choice but to stick w/ IE, not only because it is the platform in use, but also because Mozilla offers no viable alternative. Heck, all I need is a window handle. I don't care what app is hosting it or OS it's on. If I were able to suggest Firefox as a viable alternative, I most certainly would. You want me to join the revolution, but you expect me to use a gun with no bullets.
How about the fact that it is damn near impossible to write plugins because the API documentation is so elusive?
You may be interested to know that I just sent this to Mozilla:p lugin/1.0/
was refused.
I was not surprised. I first wrote a plugin for Netscape 4.x about 3 1/2 years ago. It was a painful experience. The principle reason for my negative reaction was that documentation was hard to find, often incorrect, and constantly out of date. It got worse when Netscape went to LiveConnect. And now, despite years of continued development on the browser and all this new hype surrounding the Firefox release, the plugin API is still beyond reach. How can this be explained, much less tolerated? Mozilla spreads the message that ActiveX in inherently unsafe and the cause of all our web security woes, yet makes it impossible for developers to take advantage of any (alleged) alternative. Perhaps you expect that just because Firefox supports Flash, Quicktime, and Acrobat that everyone will be satisfied to use the browser. I do not think so. I would like to support Mozilla. I really, really would. But all around, Firefox continues to look and feel and act like a second-rate stand in. It certainly is not a practical alternative to IE when real work is on the table. It's time to put up or shut up. By promoting the message that ActiveX is a danger (i.e., to my customers), you are jeopardizing my ability to make a living.
Hello,
I was just at the Mozilla plugins page and when I clicked on links to the NPAPI documentation I got a message that my connection to: http://devedge.netscape.com/library/manuals/2002/
I think it means, "it's funny...laugh." It's obscure sarcasm anyway, and it made me giggle.
is gonna be all over that.
yep, and for that matter, the Register isn't exactly a bastion for objective journalism either!
The price for albums and songs just doesn't make any sense to me at all. A movie, like LOTR, might cost $100 million to make, and yet the DVD will come out - with TONS of EXTRAS - for about the same or less than the cost of most newly released albums (I saw Return of the King offered for $19.95 at my movie store, while the new Foo Fighters was $18.99 at Borders). Yet, what does it cost to produce an album? I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that it isn't anything even close to $100 million. Furthermore, a DVD released today for $20 will cost only about $10 just a few months after the initial release. Meanwhile, the Beatles White Album still costs something like $30 a full 20-some YEARS after it was released. One could argue that most of a movie's revenue is generated in theaters, and that albums don't have that same kind of outlet (concerts are significant added costs to bands & labels, while movie theater distribution probably doesn't cost movie makers much extra). But still, there are thousands of radio stations paying royalties and the cost of making an album is dramatically less than that of making movies.
Actually, the Wall Street Journal (Career Journal) just published an article about how the office is becoming too much a of a distraction. For me, it's not "things" that distract, but rather people who distract -- too many people just walking up to my desk at random and breaking my concentration.
I have mod points and I'd mod you up Funny, but I want to comment on this article! :^)
I'm not a Python person, but...I think the issue of 20 lines versus 3 has more to do with how efficient the code is, especially once it is translated into assembly. I think the basic question you ask is a good one, but your reasons for asking seem a little off the mark. Perhaps I am misunderstanding your point about lines of code? It doesn't seem to me that the amount of typing involved has anything to do with the Java vs. Python debate.
Anyway, I'm not intending to bash those game developers in Bangladesh. I'm sure their intentions are good. Bully for Bangladeshis (?) for getting into the game development mix. :^)
I've tried iTunes and Napster. Neither downloads MP3s. They both download wma, and iPod has those m4as. In either case, it was my observation that, in order to get mp3s, one must use a 3rd party file format converter. Of course, to do so would be a violation of the licenses for those services. Maybe there is a feature I of which I am unware and perhaps someone will tell me about it. This is inside the U.S., BTW.