Whether people can find it or not is not the key issue. It is whether or not ISPs should have a list of people who have decided to surf pr0n. The government then has a kiddie pr0n problem and asks for the list. Accidental link and you are potentially an example.
My personal feeling? So what. Unlikely to affect me. But the possible implication is "guilty until proven innocent", which goes against my grain. Much like police asking to search your car when you have a broken tail light and asking what you have to hide when you refuse. "No, officer, me refusing to have you rumage through my property without probable cause is not, in itself, probable cause. Next!"
Adult sites are like a cancer and have spread. Many use techniques to aim for teens and children. And, the government, in this case, is instituting a knee jerk reaction to the problem. Not wise!
Ajax is not a Microsoft technology. Microsoft is currently creating an implementation for.NET, code named "Atlas", but it is not a Microsoft technology. But, this is SlashDot and a screed against Microsoft is the norm, even if they are not guilty as charged (even when the linked site has no mention of the evil empire).:-)
Ajax is also not horrible. Would you say "hammers suck" because you needed to cut a hole in a door frame? Ajax's largest flaw comes from its environment and is out of its control (aka, it works in a browser). When you work with a stateless environment in a program you have very little control over, the developers of the product (browser) have to envision a lot. Their psychic skills, in this instance, suck horribly. Ajax is ahead of the browsers right now. Will they catch up? Who knows.
The problem with most Ajax samples/applications is an incorrect use of the technology. Developers stuck on "kewl" mentally masturbate out horrible architecture.
"Hey, we can use ajax as our data transport". "Yo man, that would be so kewl!" "Yudda man!"
Blah! Blah! Blah!
Ajax is great for certain types of usability features. We currently use it on an application that allows a user to put in a city. Unfortunately, we cannot key this to zip code, due to the users being set in their ways, so we provide them a list as they type (google type). Yeah, it is a major kludge, but it stops the users (most of the time) from putting in Nshville for Nashville. It also reduces data clensing. Now, it would certainly be better to design the application correctly, but we have no choice due to previous dev manager's and business analysts choice to create kewl rather than fight the users on their shortsidedness (wanted to say stupidity, but I decided to be nice).
Is Ajax guilty of the things mentioned? Heck yeah! Many of the problems are mitigated when used correctly, however. And, others may or may not be an issue in your application.
Ajax will either take off or die. I am seeing a lot of it lately (mostly bad implementation), so I assume it will take off.
remember that it was Charles who intiated the conversation to have Microsoft fund 100% of his site, not Microsoft.
Your comment: That's not what i read:
From the portion you posted: So I asked for Microsoft help to avoid closing down the ASP.net Beta1 lists.
You are mixing the bequest to add ASP.NET lists and the request for money. Read the page again, only a bit more carefully.
There are other ways to look at one's ethic. I try to get it through his writing on his site. I have personally come in contact with Charles. Many years ago, he was a very nice person to talk to. Lately, he is a very self-consumed person and not very willing to listen to criticism or alternative views. This, of course, has nothing to do with ethics, but a posted marketing spiel is not a good indicator of ethics either.
Do you have any more facts that make you think so? The dealing with Microsoft is not really an ethics issue. FACT: Charles contacted Microsoft to fund him (which is plainly shown in the snippet you posted, and which I personally know to be true). FACT: Microsoft funded him, either partially or completely for quite some time (this is also posted on his site). FACT: Microsoft agreed to fund him further, with some provisos. FACT: Charles chose to shut down rather than accept the provisos.
It is well within his right to shut down. It is also well within his right to blast Microsoft and blame them because they did not want to continue pumping money into the site without some guarantees. I believe, however, that your real reason for jumping in and blasting my comments is a personal animosity towards Microsoft, as the snippets you publish show that Charles asked for money, and not the other way around.
I do not drink Microsoft kool-aid. There are many things that they have done that I despise. I currently make money programming for their systems, but I have architected Java solutions, as well, and will move back if my market jumps off the Microsoft bandwagon. But, most of the comments on this board show a strong bias against Microsoft, which makes Charles the hero of the hour, despite the fact that he was holding all of the cards here. That, to me, shows a lot of people in SlashDot drink anti-Microsoft kool-aid.
First, while Charles may be ethical (I cannot comment on his ethics, as I have not dealt with him in busines... have you?), remember that it was Charles who intiated the conversation to have Microsoft fund 100% of his site, not Microsoft. It was also his decision not to accept the deal, which is part of doing business.
Second, the ASP Friends list has helped him build his training business. While I cannot put a money value on how much his ASP Friends site has aided his business, only a fool would believe that it has had no beneficial impact. The problem with the site is it has became a sucking money hole, as it is become very popular. Because of this, Charles asked Microsoft to foot 100% of the bill and they asked for something in return for their money. Rather than negotiate, he took his case to the court of popular opinion, and there are plenty of people who would gladly take the case without all of the facts.
As for such a fine man, you obviously have not met Charles. He is prone to interrupting technical presentations to hawk books he has reviewed, as well as throw in his two cents. He is rather self-absorbed and very prone to temper tantrums. In conversations I had with him last year, he expressed complete disdain for any method of helping the community other than his lists, which I took as highly elitist. As such, I am not sure he is such an exemplary example of the open source spirit.
I do not deny the value of ASP Friends. While I personally find email lists to be annoying at times, the lists were well filtered. I am sure the lists will be missed. If he were serious about wanting to keep them up, he could have negotiated the contract details. However, I do not see that any of us that own sites DESERVE to get 100% support for nothing.
Wow, let's all just show off our anti-Microsoft bias. Let's read a highly edited snippet of a contract and assume we know enough to jump up and slam Microsoft over being the evil empire. Grow up guys!
The ASP Friends community was a rather interesting set of email lists. I personally found them annoying, as I prefer to use forums and UseNet. Some people found them highly useful, and, for them, it is bad to see the demise.
Microsoft was entering into a business dealing to agree to fund a site (pay 100% percent of the bills). If Charles did not like the contract, he had every right to do what any business does, which is negotiate. I see no evidence that he tried.
Overall, Charles has acted like a spoiled toddler when he has not gotten his way in the past. Shutting down the site without any form of negotiation, and then posting his tantrum on the web, is just another incident. He has, fortunately, found an ally in this site, which is primarily filled with people who would love to jump on Microsoft without any evidence of any wrongdoing. I, for one, refuse to drink either kool aid.
It seems there are so many legitimate topics to bitch about Microsoft over without jumping into this PR nightmare, but maybe anything you can bitch about Microsoft about is considered a valid topic.
Now, as for the title of this article, I do not see that ASP Friends was ever the premiere.NET community. Certainly, it was a set of lists that was very useful to both ASP and ASP.NET users, but THE premiere site? This sounds like a press release printed verbatum.
ZDNet conjectured that MS was doing something to write an article. There are no quotes from anyone at Microsoft, only heresay at best.
It is another article to get a rise out of each side, and is about as good as a troll in UseNet.
Re:Complete the following sequence: Xbox, silly
on
Mono Unimplementable?
·
· Score: 1
From playing with the beta,.NET is pretty sound. Passport will die an untimely death (like Bob) unless something happens to gain more support; interesting idea, but who will trust it?
Hailstorm I am up in the air about. I like the idea of services, but the web has largely been a game of FREE stuff. To make large scale web services work, you need a service specific enough to benefit businesses, but generic enough to get a large enough market share. Not sure how this will pan out.
--Greg
MS is out to control the tools more than likely. They are also probably interested in killing Java. The help to Mono and Corel expand.NET to multiple platforms.
MS is not set to make any money directly from.NET anyway. They will make it off of the tools and the services (or at least that is their vision). I see the tools being a possibility as they are way ahead of anyone with VS.NET. However, this can change. With web services, they have to dump the rediculous passport.
However, this article really deals with a bit of conjecture, as it does not really quote anyone as saying anything. It just assumes something might happen and calls that news.
No, I am not an Air Supply fan, but this particular post is about as airheaded as Reese Witherspoon in Legally Blond.
I read the ZDNet article and responded in kind there. This is not news. A quote was taken from Tony Goodhew, but the quote is not printed. It is alleged to have suggested that Microsoft might hinder Ximian from implementing.NET, but has no actual comments from anyone from MS.
From this conjecture, a whole article is created. Hell, Dorothy, your house might fly out of Kansas and land on the wicked witch. Sure, it is more likely that MS will hinder Ximian, but it is still just an OPINION and not news.
What appalls me the most is when intelligent people I normally agree with, start acting as stupid as those I disagree with. I have come to expect idiots opposing me, but to see those on "my side" acting like idiots turning conjecture into "hard news" is really appalling.
Most likely, I will be flamed for suggesting that this is not really news, but a bunch of snippets pieced together, but I really don't care. I am tired of everyone high fiving anytime MS steps, even when there is no evidence that anything is happening. I will stand behind you when you catch them at work, but I cannot stand up when the story is not a story.
Slashdot Mirror
Whether people can find it or not is not the key issue. It is whether or not ISPs should have a list of people who have decided to surf pr0n. The government then has a kiddie pr0n problem and asks for the list. Accidental link and you are potentially an example.
My personal feeling? So what. Unlikely to affect me. But the possible implication is "guilty until proven innocent", which goes against my grain. Much like police asking to search your car when you have a broken tail light and asking what you have to hide when you refuse. "No, officer, me refusing to have you rumage through my property without probable cause is not, in itself, probable cause. Next!"
Adult sites are like a cancer and have spread. Many use techniques to aim for teens and children. And, the government, in this case, is instituting a knee jerk reaction to the problem. Not wise!
Ajax is not a Microsoft technology. Microsoft is currently creating an implementation for .NET, code named "Atlas", but it is not a Microsoft technology. But, this is SlashDot and a screed against Microsoft is the norm, even if they are not guilty as charged (even when the linked site has no mention of the evil empire). :-)
Ajax is also not horrible. Would you say "hammers suck" because you needed to cut a hole in a door frame? Ajax's largest flaw comes from its environment and is out of its control (aka, it works in a browser). When you work with a stateless environment in a program you have very little control over, the developers of the product (browser) have to envision a lot. Their psychic skills, in this instance, suck horribly. Ajax is ahead of the browsers right now. Will they catch up? Who knows.
The problem with most Ajax samples/applications is an incorrect use of the technology. Developers stuck on "kewl" mentally masturbate out horrible architecture.
"Hey, we can use ajax as our data transport".
"Yo man, that would be so kewl!"
"Yudda man!"
Blah! Blah! Blah!
Ajax is great for certain types of usability features. We currently use it on an application that allows a user to put in a city. Unfortunately, we cannot key this to zip code, due to the users being set in their ways, so we provide them a list as they type (google type). Yeah, it is a major kludge, but it stops the users (most of the time) from putting in Nshville for Nashville. It also reduces data clensing. Now, it would certainly be better to design the application correctly, but we have no choice due to previous dev manager's and business analysts choice to create kewl rather than fight the users on their shortsidedness (wanted to say stupidity, but I decided to be nice).
Is Ajax guilty of the things mentioned? Heck yeah! Many of the problems are mitigated when used correctly, however. And, others may or may not be an issue in your application.
Ajax will either take off or die. I am seeing a lot of it lately (mostly bad implementation), so I assume it will take off.
remember that it was Charles who intiated the conversation to have Microsoft fund 100% of his site, not Microsoft.
Your comment: That's not what i read:
From the portion you posted: So I asked for Microsoft help to avoid closing down the ASP.net Beta1 lists.
You are mixing the bequest to add ASP.NET lists and the request for money. Read the page again, only a bit more carefully.
There are other ways to look at one's ethic. I try to get it through his writing on his site. I have personally come in contact with Charles. Many years ago, he was a very nice person to talk to. Lately, he is a very self-consumed person and not very willing to listen to criticism or alternative views. This, of course, has nothing to do with ethics, but a posted marketing spiel is not a good indicator of ethics either.
Do you have any more facts that make you think so?
The dealing with Microsoft is not really an ethics issue. FACT: Charles contacted Microsoft to fund him (which is plainly shown in the snippet you posted, and which I personally know to be true). FACT: Microsoft funded him, either partially or completely for quite some time (this is also posted on his site). FACT: Microsoft agreed to fund him further, with some provisos. FACT: Charles chose to shut down rather than accept the provisos.
It is well within his right to shut down. It is also well within his right to blast Microsoft and blame them because they did not want to continue pumping money into the site without some guarantees. I believe, however, that your real reason for jumping in and blasting my comments is a personal animosity towards Microsoft, as the snippets you publish show that Charles asked for money, and not the other way around.
I do not drink Microsoft kool-aid. There are many things that they have done that I despise. I currently make money programming for their systems, but I have architected Java solutions, as well, and will move back if my market jumps off the Microsoft bandwagon. But, most of the comments on this board show a strong bias against Microsoft, which makes Charles the hero of the hour, despite the fact that he was holding all of the cards here. That, to me, shows a lot of people in SlashDot drink anti-Microsoft kool-aid.
First, while Charles may be ethical (I cannot comment on his ethics, as I have not dealt with him in busines ... have you?), remember that it was Charles who intiated the conversation to have Microsoft fund 100% of his site, not Microsoft. It was also his decision not to accept the deal, which is part of doing business.
Second, the ASP Friends list has helped him build his training business. While I cannot put a money value on how much his ASP Friends site has aided his business, only a fool would believe that it has had no beneficial impact. The problem with the site is it has became a sucking money hole, as it is become very popular. Because of this, Charles asked Microsoft to foot 100% of the bill and they asked for something in return for their money. Rather than negotiate, he took his case to the court of popular opinion, and there are plenty of people who would gladly take the case without all of the facts.
As for such a fine man, you obviously have not met Charles. He is prone to interrupting technical presentations to hawk books he has reviewed, as well as throw in his two cents. He is rather self-absorbed and very prone to temper tantrums. In conversations I had with him last year, he expressed complete disdain for any method of helping the community other than his lists, which I took as highly elitist. As such, I am not sure he is such an exemplary example of the open source spirit.
I do not deny the value of ASP Friends. While I personally find email lists to be annoying at times, the lists were well filtered. I am sure the lists will be missed. If he were serious about wanting to keep them up, he could have negotiated the contract details. However, I do not see that any of us that own sites DESERVE to get 100% support for nothing.
Wow, let's all just show off our anti-Microsoft bias. Let's read a highly edited snippet of a contract and assume we know enough to jump up and slam Microsoft over being the evil empire. Grow up guys!
.NET community. Certainly, it was a set of lists that was very useful to both ASP and ASP.NET users, but THE premiere site? This sounds like a press release printed verbatum.
The ASP Friends community was a rather interesting set of email lists. I personally found them annoying, as I prefer to use forums and UseNet. Some people found them highly useful, and, for them, it is bad to see the demise.
Microsoft was entering into a business dealing to agree to fund a site (pay 100% percent of the bills). If Charles did not like the contract, he had every right to do what any business does, which is negotiate. I see no evidence that he tried.
Overall, Charles has acted like a spoiled toddler when he has not gotten his way in the past. Shutting down the site without any form of negotiation, and then posting his tantrum on the web, is just another incident. He has, fortunately, found an ally in this site, which is primarily filled with people who would love to jump on Microsoft without any evidence of any wrongdoing. I, for one, refuse to drink either kool aid.
It seems there are so many legitimate topics to bitch about Microsoft over without jumping into this PR nightmare, but maybe anything you can bitch about Microsoft about is considered a valid topic.
Now, as for the title of this article, I do not see that ASP Friends was ever the premiere
It is nothing! PERIOD!
ZDNet conjectured that MS was doing something to write an article. There are no quotes from anyone at Microsoft, only heresay at best.
It is another article to get a rise out of each side, and is about as good as a troll in UseNet.
From playing with the beta, .NET is pretty sound. Passport will die an untimely death (like Bob) unless something happens to gain more support; interesting idea, but who will trust it?
Hailstorm I am up in the air about. I like the idea of services, but the web has largely been a game of FREE stuff. To make large scale web services work, you need a service specific enough to benefit businesses, but generic enough to get a large enough market share. Not sure how this will pan out.
--Greg
MS is out to control the tools more than likely. They are also probably interested in killing Java. The help to Mono and Corel expand .NET to multiple platforms.
.NET anyway. They will make it off of the tools and the services (or at least that is their vision). I see the tools being a possibility as they are way ahead of anyone with VS.NET. However, this can change. With web services, they have to dump the rediculous passport.
MS is not set to make any money directly from
However, this article really deals with a bit of conjecture, as it does not really quote anyone as saying anything. It just assumes something might happen and calls that news.
No, I am not an Air Supply fan, but this particular post is about as airheaded as Reese Witherspoon in Legally Blond.
.NET, but has no actual comments from anyone from MS.
I read the ZDNet article and responded in kind there. This is not news. A quote was taken from Tony Goodhew, but the quote is not printed. It is alleged to have suggested that Microsoft might hinder Ximian from implementing
From this conjecture, a whole article is created. Hell, Dorothy, your house might fly out of Kansas and land on the wicked witch. Sure, it is more likely that MS will hinder Ximian, but it is still just an OPINION and not news.
What appalls me the most is when intelligent people I normally agree with, start acting as stupid as those I disagree with. I have come to expect idiots opposing me, but to see those on "my side" acting like idiots turning conjecture into "hard news" is really appalling.
Most likely, I will be flamed for suggesting that this is not really news, but a bunch of snippets pieced together, but I really don't care. I am tired of everyone high fiving anytime MS steps, even when there is no evidence that anything is happening. I will stand behind you when you catch them at work, but I cannot stand up when the story is not a story.
Peace!