And while that shouldn't happen at all, at least with Ubuntu you can often recover from such a state by switching to a terminal and restarting Compiz and/or X. Not the case with Windows.
It's the polar opposite of Buzz. You have to add friends manually, and manually assign them to one of four "circles" (Family, Friends, Acquaintances, Following.)
Then with EVERY damn thing you post, you have to assign to one or more groups.
So you get very fine-grained control, but at the cost of usability. It really is the opposite of Buzz in that way.
No, the change is NOT only a number. Mozilla has stated that every major version change breaks ABI compatibility.
That probably doesn't matter to you (it certainly doesn't to me) but if a company distributes Firefox extensions for their employees, they're going to have an upgrade headache on their hands.
Right, because all illegal immigrants commit crimes. It's not that they're looking to move to a country that's safer where they can work their asses off for less than minimum wage to make a better future for themselves. Nope, that could NEVER be the case.
Why do you assume we'd need cross-platform applications that don't need to be compiled for each platform? That doesn't seem like a necessity, it seems like something that would be nice to have but comes with serious drawbacks.
With AT&T's 3G, the latency is so bad that it feels far slower than the speed would imply. I think just publishing the speed is only a small part of the overall picture.
Or what about Mexico? It's not that far from Canada, and they've had plastic bills for years.
Re:Consoles don't require signatures on JS or SWF
on
Where Is Firefox OS?
·
· Score: 1
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Windows doesn't come with tools to quickly set up a user-level sandbox; an administrator would have to install such tools. It does come with a web browser.
Who said anything about Windows? You're comparing apples and oranges here (no pun intended).
We're talking about creating a new OS that's based on a web browser. Why would we compare that to an existing OS? If we're going to write a new OS anyway, we'd might as well do it right and not get bogged down by legacy mistakes.
The problem is much worse with Amazon, Google, DropBox, etc. With those services you're uploading the file itself to their servers. The RIAA could stomp in with a fancypants court order and demand to see your music collection.
With iCloud you're not uploading the file; you're getting the "right" to play a different copy of the file that already exists on Apple's servers. Even if the RIAA came in, it's not clear there's much they could do.
The author of the article seems to think they're just hashing the file.
It's a stupid assumption, because you could easily fool it unless Apple had already scanned every song ever made, encoded it with every configuration of every version of every encoder ever developed, and stored the hash.
Are you actually uploading the MP3s to Apple? I don't think so.
The service has to "fingerprint" the files in some way. A hash of the file wouldn't be enough to identify it, since there could be an unlimited number of hashes for the same song.
At most, it's probably like SoundHound or Shazam that just listens to the track. Based on that type of analytic data, there's no way the RIAA or whoever could know whether you purchased the track legally or not.
In the case of PCs, the native code would have to have been installed by the computer's administrator.
Nope. You can run just about anything in a user-level sandbox.
In the case of appliances, even the owner of a device isn't an administrator. All native code must be digitally signed by the appliance manufacturer, and some well-known manufacturers have long had a blanket policy not to sign anything developed at home.
The performance difference between a well designed OOP program and a hand-coded assembly program is negligible compared to the difference between native code and running an application through a web browser.
Slashdot Mirror
And while that shouldn't happen at all, at least with Ubuntu you can often recover from such a state by switching to a terminal and restarting Compiz and/or X. Not the case with Windows.
Pro Git is a great resource if you want to get into Git. (You can buy a dead tree version as well.)
Google Time Machine sounds a lot more fun than the Apple version.
"Like" is too SoCal. Where Google is from they say "Hella."
I think they finally "get it" with Plus; users want Facebook with better privacy controls. It's an evolutionary step.
But I'd estimate Plus has maybe 2-3 months of glitches to fix before it hits an open beta.
Yes, you can create new Circles.
Not sure where you're seeing that. I was able to add someone to two circles with no problem.
It's the polar opposite of Buzz. You have to add friends manually, and manually assign them to one of four "circles" (Family, Friends, Acquaintances, Following.)
Then with EVERY damn thing you post, you have to assign to one or more groups.
So you get very fine-grained control, but at the cost of usability. It really is the opposite of Buzz in that way.
No, the change is NOT only a number. Mozilla has stated that every major version change breaks ABI compatibility.
That probably doesn't matter to you (it certainly doesn't to me) but if a company distributes Firefox extensions for their employees, they're going to have an upgrade headache on their hands.
Like it's so hard to find free, pirated TV shows streaming on the web today? I'm not sure how it could get any easier.
When you develop software, you have to actually explain your thinking in detail -- something you failed to do.
But I guess you might be good at writing comments!
There's crimes and then there's crimes. Let's not compare a traffic ticket to killing someone.
Right, because all illegal immigrants commit crimes. It's not that they're looking to move to a country that's safer where they can work their asses off for less than minimum wage to make a better future for themselves. Nope, that could NEVER be the case.
Why do you assume we'd need cross-platform applications that don't need to be compiled for each platform? That doesn't seem like a necessity, it seems like something that would be nice to have but comes with serious drawbacks.
With AT&T's 3G, the latency is so bad that it feels far slower than the speed would imply. I think just publishing the speed is only a small part of the overall picture.
Oh my! I didn't know Cory Doctorow commented on Slashdot!
Circuit board: $10
Computer chips: $80
Soldering iron: $30
Looking like a huge dork: Priceless.
Or what about Mexico? It's not that far from Canada, and they've had plastic bills for years.
Who said anything about Windows? You're comparing apples and oranges here (no pun intended).
We're talking about creating a new OS that's based on a web browser. Why would we compare that to an existing OS? If we're going to write a new OS anyway, we'd might as well do it right and not get bogged down by legacy mistakes.
The problem is much worse with Amazon, Google, DropBox, etc. With those services you're uploading the file itself to their servers. The RIAA could stomp in with a fancypants court order and demand to see your music collection.
With iCloud you're not uploading the file; you're getting the "right" to play a different copy of the file that already exists on Apple's servers. Even if the RIAA came in, it's not clear there's much they could do.
The author of the article seems to think they're just hashing the file.
It's a stupid assumption, because you could easily fool it unless Apple had already scanned every song ever made, encoded it with every configuration of every version of every encoder ever developed, and stored the hash.
Are you actually uploading the MP3s to Apple? I don't think so.
The service has to "fingerprint" the files in some way. A hash of the file wouldn't be enough to identify it, since there could be an unlimited number of hashes for the same song.
At most, it's probably like SoundHound or Shazam that just listens to the track. Based on that type of analytic data, there's no way the RIAA or whoever could know whether you purchased the track legally or not.
Nope. You can run just about anything in a user-level sandbox.
They'll do the same thing with Javascript.
How is this bad for Apple? Isn't having cases available a good thing?
The performance difference between a well designed OOP program and a hand-coded assembly program is negligible compared to the difference between native code and running an application through a web browser.