The best reason I can think of is portability.... Want to use it on Linux? No need to wait for Microsoft to update the Linux app (if they ever bother to update it),...
Two problems with this. First, codecs and patents are still an issue. The latest working draft of ORTC contains this example of a connection, notice how often it says "common":// Steps to be followed:// 1. Determine the RTP features that the receiver and sender have in common.// 2. Determine the codecs that the sender and receiver have in common.// 3. Within each common codec, determine the common formats, header extensions and rtcpFeedback mechanisms.// 4. Determine the payloadType to be used, based on the receiver preferredPayloadType.// 5. Set RTCRtcpParameters such as mux to their default values.// 6. Return RTCRtpParameters enablig the jointly supported features and codecs.
Second, central control by Microsoft (or Google, Apple, etc...) with a focus on ICE/STUN/TURN rather than open proxies (like Skype had before Microsoft) or a new and open solution for P2P connections. ORTC hasn't eliminated P2P, but it's not the focus and won't get any love from giant multinationals that can't make money on it.
What? They can start with 1 satellite over a wealthy area... or 10, or 100. Global coverage is a very rare concern. Most people care if their home is covered.
The challenges are collecting payment under a huge variety of legal and tax systems, and charging a cheap enough rate in poor areas.
A crafty lawyer or government agent could try to turn that into... God knows what... about me. In court. Where the burden of proof is suddenly shifted on *me* to prove that I'm not a closet Neo-Fascist/homosexual/serial killer/nuclear terrorist/misogynist/anime fan.
If the URL was illegal, the government filters should have stopped it. QED
The security feature on your phone is designed to not unlock unless you signify approval.
In what sense? Did the Apple invite lawyers into the design process and ask them "would a fingerprint constitute approval?" A fingerprint on a phone has functionality, but meaning is not "designed" into it. Meaning has to be determined in context.
(and for all the complaints of teaching to the test, we need some objective way to find schools that aren't working).
Bureaucracy wants to find schools that aren't working "objectively" -- people just want good schools and don't care how it happens. Administrators should be responsible for closing failing schools and get fired when they don't, but the administrators want an "objective" CYA solution to identifying failing schools. IT people know this game as: make a technical solution that works well (make an effort and take pride in it), or one that only meets the spec. (and absolve yourself of responsibility.)
He said he wants to retire on Mars, takes on the auto industry with an electric car, builds a multi-billion dollar battery factory, builds a spaceship and wins a $2.8(?) billion contract to develop it... and this is too far? What were you saying 10 years ago?
You could argue that there are several legitmate uses for the software.... How is this software marketed? Is it strictly to stalkers? I kind of doubt it. It's just a technology that can be used for nefarious purposes.
Kim Dotcom and Megaupload made it clear that having a lawful, substantial use is not a defense. Not for todays Department of Justice.
It is hard to see how they FBI can prove their case.
Why would they need to? Threaten 35 years under the CFAA and plea bargain them.
It's the law of the jungle for software and the internet -- don't be small or slow or you might become prey.
Do you want a crockpot that has to be replaced at every few years—or at least that will be forever upgrading itself? Would apps change your mind?
When enough others decide to buy an app-able crockpot, you won't have any choice but too buy one as well. The market does not provide what people want -- it provides what is profitable.
The fact that they're not forcing G+ on you anymore means that after 5 years of trying, they gave up trying to beat Facebook and decided not to piss off their core users any further.
Which is not the same as trying to regain the trust of their users: Google tried to leverage us, to use it's dominant position to push us into an unwanted social network, and did so in sleazy ways ("Ok, We'll ask you again later").
Google owes us an apology. It's not enough to cancel G+ and try to quietly undo it.
Current revisions only, no talk or user pages. (This is probably the one you want. The size of the 13 February 2014 dump is approximately 9.85 GB compressed, 44 GB uncompressed).
Why is it called a "debate"? Are the ISP oligopolies putting forward new ideas for discussion? This is nothing but ISPs trying to define the market to their advantage, and get the FCC to endorse their definition.
Further, this is the media reporting on the interests of big business and (surprise!) re-casting it as a important national issue. Why do newspapers have a Business section instead of a Labor section?
Anything done on a computer is a crime under CFAA, if the prosecutor wants it to be. And if you make a fake FB account to deceive a judge and lie in court about it, you'll get the Aaron Swartz "hacker" treatment.
The GPU front is bleaker. Both nVidia and AMD use third party fabs like TSMC, so there's no competitive advantage to be had.
Intel 14nm fab capacity is potentially game changing -- they've held back 2 huge fabs with double the normal capacity, and they still have enough for their own chips. I predict that Intel is going into the 14nm business, and either nVidia or AMD would be interesting clients.
I would have thought the Great Java Wars had taught everyone that true cross-platform development is a chimera that isn't worth either the vendor or developer's effort. Platform vendors compete on features -- cross platform is antithetical to competition on features.
Remember when people called browsers "platforms" and the websites were "applications"? 20+ years of the web has shown that cross platform works, that what counts as a platform is malleable, and that the features companies compete over, change over time. Today in mobile language is a feature in contention, but if Cordova (et al.) become popular, Apple and Google will compete over different features.
“We have never heard of PRISM. We do not provide any government agency with direct access to our servers, and any government agency requesting customer data must get a court order.” -- Apple on PRISM
I'd give odds that "not technically feasible" or "cannot access this data" have similar interpretations.
I made this half-Java, half-Database monster to please you But I get the feeling that you don't like it What's with all the screaming? You like Databases, you like the JVM Maybe you don't like monsters so much Maybe I used too many Databases Isn't it enough to know that I ruined Java making a gift for you?
... employees with STEM degrees have critical thinking skills *and* STEM degrees. Just sayin'.
Some do, but the stereotype of IT having a myopic view of technology and projects didn't spring from nowhere. If you've worked in IT you've met many people who don't have strong critical thinking skills or the broader view needed for many projects.
*I* just want to code -- let others with liberal arts degrees be management.
Yes it's a Slashvertisement, but they're not wrong about MOOCs being a failure. Even regular courses with "online components" are mostly bookkeeping: event calendars, file storage, short quizzes and anemic forums (where students get points for how many comments they make). Where's the value? MOOCs are all that, plus no credits, no deadlines and you don't know anyone.
Slashdot Mirror
No pre tags anymore? WTF Slashdot?
The best reason I can think of is portability. ... Want to use it on Linux? No need to wait for Microsoft to update the Linux app (if they ever bother to update it), ...
Two problems with this. First, codecs and patents are still an issue. The latest working draft of ORTC contains this example of a connection, notice how often it says "common": // Steps to be followed: // 1. Determine the RTP features that the receiver and sender have in common. // 2. Determine the codecs that the sender and receiver have in common. // 3. Within each common codec, determine the common formats, header extensions and rtcpFeedback mechanisms. // 4. Determine the payloadType to be used, based on the receiver preferredPayloadType. // 5. Set RTCRtcpParameters such as mux to their default values. // 6. Return RTCRtpParameters enablig the jointly supported features and codecs.
Second, central control by Microsoft (or Google, Apple, etc...) with a focus on ICE/STUN/TURN rather than open proxies (like Skype had before Microsoft) or a new and open solution for P2P connections. ORTC hasn't eliminated P2P, but it's not the focus and won't get any love from giant multinationals that can't make money on it.
The system doesn't work until it's global
What? They can start with 1 satellite over a wealthy area... or 10, or 100. Global coverage is a very rare concern. Most people care if their home is covered.
The challenges are collecting payment under a huge variety of legal and tax systems, and charging a cheap enough rate in poor areas.
A crafty lawyer or government agent could try to turn that into... God knows what... about me. In court. Where the burden of proof is suddenly shifted on *me* to prove that I'm not a closet Neo-Fascist/homosexual/serial killer/nuclear terrorist/misogynist/anime fan.
If the URL was illegal, the government filters should have stopped it. QED
The security feature on your phone is designed to not unlock unless you signify approval.
In what sense? Did the Apple invite lawyers into the design process and ask them "would a fingerprint constitute approval?" A fingerprint on a phone has functionality, but meaning is not "designed" into it. Meaning has to be determined in context.
(and for all the complaints of teaching to the test, we need some objective way to find schools that aren't working).
Bureaucracy wants to find schools that aren't working "objectively" -- people just want good schools and don't care how it happens. Administrators should be responsible for closing failing schools and get fired when they don't, but the administrators want an "objective" CYA solution to identifying failing schools. IT people know this game as: make a technical solution that works well (make an effort and take pride in it), or one that only meets the spec. (and absolve yourself of responsibility.)
Well here's something we don't see everyday: a "story" about job interviews on SlashDice!
"There, there," Yossarian said, because he did not know what else to say. "There, there."
Googles business model is to search the web and sell ads on the web; email is small potatoes.
Calling him a hypocrite doesn't make you right, or him wrong.
They're not dead yet. Now with Cloud! Sharing! Mobile!
I think Musk just jumped the shark.
He said he wants to retire on Mars, takes on the auto industry with an electric car, builds a multi-billion dollar battery factory, builds a spaceship and wins a $2.8(?) billion contract to develop it ... and this is too far? What were you saying 10 years ago?
You could argue that there are several legitmate uses for the software. ... How is this software marketed? Is it strictly to stalkers? I kind of doubt it. It's just a technology that can be used for nefarious purposes.
Kim Dotcom and Megaupload made it clear that having a lawful, substantial use is not a defense. Not for todays Department of Justice.
It is hard to see how they FBI can prove their case.
Why would they need to? Threaten 35 years under the CFAA and plea bargain them.
It's the law of the jungle for software and the internet -- don't be small or slow or you might become prey.
Duh, they buy startups.
Do you want a crockpot that has to be replaced at every few years—or at least that will be forever upgrading itself? Would apps change your mind?
When enough others decide to buy an app-able crockpot, you won't have any choice but too buy one as well. The market does not provide what people want -- it provides what is profitable.
The fact that they're not forcing G+ on you anymore means that after 5 years of trying, they gave up trying to beat Facebook and decided not to piss off their core users any further.
Which is not the same as trying to regain the trust of their users: Google tried to leverage us, to use it's dominant position to push us into an unwanted social network, and did so in sleazy ways ("Ok, We'll ask you again later").
Google owes us an apology. It's not enough to cancel G+ and try to quietly undo it.
44GB. Surprising. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W...
Current revisions only, no talk or user pages. (This is probably the one you want. The size of the 13 February 2014 dump is approximately 9.85 GB compressed, 44 GB uncompressed).
Why is it called a "debate"? Are the ISP oligopolies putting forward new ideas for discussion? This is nothing but ISPs trying to define the market to their advantage, and get the FCC to endorse their definition.
Further, this is the media reporting on the interests of big business and (surprise!) re-casting it as a important national issue. Why do newspapers have a Business section instead of a Labor section?
Anything done on a computer is a crime under CFAA, if the prosecutor wants it to be. And if you make a fake FB account to deceive a judge and lie in court about it, you'll get the Aaron Swartz "hacker" treatment.
The GPU front is bleaker. Both nVidia and AMD use third party fabs like TSMC, so there's no competitive advantage to be had.
Intel 14nm fab capacity is potentially game changing -- they've held back 2 huge fabs with double the normal capacity, and they still have enough for their own chips. I predict that Intel is going into the 14nm business, and either nVidia or AMD would be interesting clients.
I would have thought the Great Java Wars had taught everyone that true cross-platform development is a chimera that isn't worth either the vendor or developer's effort. Platform vendors compete on features -- cross platform is antithetical to competition on features.
Remember when people called browsers "platforms" and the websites were "applications"? 20+ years of the web has shown that cross platform works, that what counts as a platform is malleable, and that the features companies compete over, change over time. Today in mobile language is a feature in contention, but if Cordova (et al.) become popular, Apple and Google will compete over different features.
“We have never heard of PRISM. We do not provide any government agency with direct access to our servers, and any government agency requesting customer data must get a court order.” -- Apple on PRISM
I'd give odds that "not technically feasible" or "cannot access this data" have similar interpretations.
I made this half-Java, half-Database monster to please you
But I get the feeling that you don't like it
What's with all the screaming?
You like Databases, you like the JVM
Maybe you don't like monsters so much
Maybe I used too many Databases
Isn't it enough to know that I ruined Java making a gift for you?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...
Some do, but the stereotype of IT having a myopic view of technology and projects didn't spring from nowhere. If you've worked in IT you've met many people who don't have strong critical thinking skills or the broader view needed for many projects.
*I* just want to code -- let others with liberal arts degrees be management.
Why even bother getting an extention? We all know the program will continue anyway.
Because the FISA court put the NSA on Double Secret Probation
Yes it's a Slashvertisement, but they're not wrong about MOOCs being a failure. Even regular courses with "online components" are mostly bookkeeping: event calendars, file storage, short quizzes and anemic forums (where students get points for how many comments they make). Where's the value? MOOCs are all that, plus no credits, no deadlines and you don't know anyone.