Palladium is Draconian. It ultimately attempts to use DRM to maintain what is quickly becoming an obsolete strategy to information and publishing. Intelligent use of bandwidth is the key, not perpetual attempts to control the information-content itself. Microsoft needs to get a clue.
The "legendary" (Nolan Bushnell) Atari has been gone for a long time already. However, the Atari we all grew up with and loved, and still love, shall go on forever in the form of MAME and Atari 2600 emulators.
Those who have closely followed the unfolding of NSI since their early days are no doubt unsurprised by this story. Those, like John Gilmore, having tracked the development o f NSI back to SAIC and DARPA are likely to have an ever-increasing "See, I told you so" conspiracy-theorist standpoint. NSI, in many ways, is the Microsoft of the DNS world. NSI wishes to offer services in exchange for money, yet at the same time, wants to also maintain control of those who are their customers.
It is seemingly paradoxical how companies selling technology offer their products as enabling of opportunity and yet, ultimately want to use that opportunity to create further dependency upon themselves. Slashdot itself, at some point will seek refuge in its popularity and economic viability, thus corrupting its own indealism by way of regulating and moderating its "free" speech claims.
I find it amusing that so often, technologically-inclined folks have this sort of "religious" appreciation for Google, as if it is the only search engine technology worthy of regular use or mass consumption. Nothing could be further from the truth. While I will admit that Google is my first (but not only) search engine of choice (and only for certain types of searches), I would like to state my general feelings on the current state of search engine technologies which, I would like to characterize as "brilliant yet balkanized".
Before I do that, and in all fairness to Google, I would like to say that Google's PageRank technology is, for the most part, decent, although certainly not universally-superior.
Google however, has a lot of room for improvement. Some suggestions?
(1) Search Result(s) Clustering
Take a look at Vivisimo.com... They are a company widely recognized for having the most intelligent results-clustering technology.
I find it bizarre that Google often reports to me that there are hundreds of thousands -- sometimes millions -- of results...and yet, gives me the "option" of browsing those results in a top-down linear fashion.
I feel that this is unreasonable. If Google were to CLUSTER results (especially in cases where there are >5000 results), I feel the end user would be much better served.
Google could certainly license Vivisimo.com's clustering technology...or implement their own proprietary form. Either way, I am amazed that Google's results are still not clustered -- even if that clustering was a checkbox option to do so.
It's just not sensible to often report thousands and sometimes millions of results, and then give the user an oversimplified top-down (linear) interface to browse through those results.
(2) "Visual" Search technologies.
I've been a regular user of Kartoo.com for some time now. I find it to be the most well-implemented keyword-connectedness research tool I've ever encountered. SEO-enthusiasts are blessed to have (for now) free access to Kartoo.com. It is also a spectacular implementation of Flash for a purpose other than just "looking slick" and being flashy.
Kartoo allows a person to easily (and very neatly) diagram the keyword commonalities that connect and relate documents on the web.
Unfortunately, the Kartoo interface seems to apply to a limited database. Kartoo functionality on top of Google's database would be ideal, in my opinion.
What am I suggesting? Personally, I would love to see Google buy out or license the Kartoo technology and let users apply it to the Google database. Kartoo really is a very intelligent and useful keyword relevancy diagram tool.
(3) Recursive searching of previous-generation results.
For the longest time, I never knew Google had this ability. Why? Well... after your initial Google search, you only see the "Search within results" link at the BOTTOM of the results list. I feel this option should be available at both the top and bottom of the results list.
(4) Memetic Histography
Take a quick look at HitBrain.com. While far from "perfect", they seem to be doing the best job thus far at keyword frequency tracking. While perhaps "novelty", I think there is real demographics-research value in the following sort of functionality:
Allowing registered users to track relative frequencies of keyword/keyphrase data sets. By this, I mean that a person could, for example, keep an ongoing (daily/weekly/monthly/etc) table of the number of instances of certain search tokens. For example, "john lennon" vs "paul mccartney"...or "microsoft" vs "macintosh"...etc. I think anyone who qualifies as an information age demographer has a use for tracking (over time) relative frequencies of keywords and keyphrases. There is also some entertainment value in seeing how many instances of "good" there are relative to "evil", etc.
(5) ISO search engine syntax standards. I think it would be nice if there was an ISO standard for search engine syntax. I personally prefer Boolean searches to non-Boolean searches (especially when clustering of results is not available). I think that all search engines should accept an ISO syntax standard for searching that, at the very least, allows for advanced Boolean queries, and also, string-proximity-specifying (that is, results for "A" within X number of characters/words from "B", etc) capabilities. Wildcard-capable advanced Boolean and string-proximity-specifying are very useful functions, and would be nice to see ISOfied on all major search engines.
It troubles me that the +" " and -" " syntax doesn't work on all my favourite search engines.
(6) DNS search capabilities.
Take a look at WhoisReport.com (now Whois.sc) and see what it can do for you. I have yet to find a better resource for searching the actual DNS itself.
Some may frown on the searching of the DNS itself but, the truth is, to a respectable degree, the DNS itself has evolved into being a useful directory of sorts. Name Intelligence (the people behind Whois.sc) make their technology available as an API, and Google would be wise to add DNS search capabilities to their WWW search capabilities.
I like Pixar...I've followed them very closely since their inception.
I do think, however, they should do the following:
(1) Make a "LEGO-mation" film named "LEGOLAND", using state-of-the-art 3D computer animation tools. There are endless possibilities...and humour twists which could arise from the nature of how LEGO bricks lock together. LEGO computer software has been a hit...I see no reason why a cool LEGOLAND movie, done through computer animation ("LEGO-mation"), wouldn't also be a hit.
(2) A sequel to TRON
--Michael
Hello fellow Slashdotters.
I am very pleased to see this newly-released report by Michael Geist. Several months ago, I got a very embittering crash-course in the UDRP process. The conclusion I arrived at is that the UDRP needs MAJOR REFORM.
I am the registrant of the Tobacco.com domain name. I have been since 1995.
Earlier this year, I received a "cease and desist" letter from a "company" calling itself "Tobacco.com, Inc.". This "entity" was nothing more than a bogus (as in fraudulent) culmination of several pieces of filled-out paperwork, in an attempt to superficially "legitimze" themselves. They attempted to reverse domain name hijack Tobacco.com, by way of their filing a UDRP against myself.
To make a long story short...
I immediately sought Counsel with John Berryhill, an expert-attorney in the area of trademark law and, one who has a great deal of experience with UDRP defense work. Seeking John Berryhill's aid was the best thing I could have possibly done in this case.
On May 18th of this year, they withdrew their complaint against myself. (After seeing my response and realizing their fraud was easily uncovered.)
My complaint, then? The UDRP makes it ALL TOO EASY for frivolous and fraudulent complaints to be brought forth. This means the UDRP can easily be used to effectively harass domain name registrants. I spent nearly $3500 defending myself against fraud which, if the UDRP was more intelligently crafted, would have never even been considered as a legitimate case.
Personally, I think that generic terms (such as "tobacco") should be completely exempted from UDRP process.
To add insult to injury, the NAF (the arbitration panel which was selected to hear the case) ended up keeping my $1250 three-person panel fee, EVEN THOUGH THE PANEL NEVER SAT! To me, that is criminal activity on the behalf of the NAF. ( The Register published a news item on this, specifically, at : http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/19217.html )
I decided to organize all information related to my case, and publish my findings online. I only hope that what I've assembled can serve to help others who face UDRP injustices.
The casework can be seen at :
http://Tobacco.com/attempted-hijacking
Warmest Regards,
Michael Fischer
Slashdot Mirror
Palladium is Draconian. It ultimately attempts to use DRM to maintain what is quickly becoming an obsolete strategy to information and publishing. Intelligent use of bandwidth is the key, not perpetual attempts to control the information-content itself. Microsoft needs to get a clue.
LadyboyLovers.com
The "legendary" (Nolan Bushnell) Atari has been gone for a long time already. However, the Atari we all grew up with and loved, and still love, shall go on forever in the form of MAME and Atari 2600 emulators.
--MFInc
LadyboyLovers.com
Those who have closely followed the unfolding of NSI since their early days are no doubt unsurprised by this story. Those, like John Gilmore, having tracked the development o f NSI back to SAIC and DARPA are likely to have an ever-increasing "See, I told you so" conspiracy-theorist standpoint. NSI, in many ways, is the Microsoft of the DNS world. NSI wishes to offer services in exchange for money, yet at the same time, wants to also maintain control of those who are their customers.
It is seemingly paradoxical how companies selling technology offer their products as enabling of opportunity and yet, ultimately want to use that opportunity to create further dependency upon themselves. Slashdot itself, at some point will seek refuge in its popularity and economic viability, thus corrupting its own indealism by way of regulating and moderating its "free" speech claims.
LadyboyLovers.comI was inspired enough by the news of this new display technology so as to Google related information.
I encourage fellow Slashdotters to browse these two EE Times articles.
Both articles are very informative.
http://www.eetimes.com/news/97/941news/mems.html
http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20000717S0071
--MFInc
BEEF.com
Tobacco.comI find it amusing that so often, technologically-inclined folks have this sort of "religious" appreciation for Google, as if it is the only search engine technology worthy of regular use or mass consumption. Nothing could be further from the truth. While I will admit that Google is my first (but not only) search engine of choice (and only for certain types of searches), I would like to state my general feelings on the current state of search engine technologies which, I would like to characterize as "brilliant yet balkanized".
Before I do that, and in all fairness to Google, I would like to say that Google's PageRank technology is, for the most part, decent, although certainly not universally-superior.
Google however, has a lot of room for improvement. Some suggestions?
(1) Search Result(s) Clustering
Take a look at Vivisimo.com... They are a company widely recognized for having the most intelligent results-clustering technology.
I find it bizarre that Google often reports to me that there are hundreds of thousands -- sometimes millions -- of results...and yet, gives me the "option" of browsing those results in a top-down linear fashion.
I feel that this is unreasonable. If Google were to CLUSTER results (especially in cases where there are >5000 results), I feel the end user would be much better served.
Google could certainly license Vivisimo.com's clustering technology...or implement their own proprietary form. Either way, I am amazed that Google's results are still not clustered -- even if that clustering was a checkbox option to do so.
It's just not sensible to often report thousands and sometimes millions of results, and then give the user an oversimplified top-down (linear) interface to browse through those results.
(2) "Visual" Search technologies.
I've been a regular user of Kartoo.com for some time now. I find it to be the most well-implemented keyword-connectedness research tool I've ever encountered. SEO-enthusiasts are blessed to have (for now) free access to Kartoo.com. It is also a spectacular implementation of Flash for a purpose other than just "looking slick" and being flashy.
Kartoo allows a person to easily (and very neatly) diagram the keyword commonalities that connect and relate documents on the web.
Unfortunately, the Kartoo interface seems to apply to a limited database. Kartoo functionality on top of Google's database would be ideal, in my opinion.
What am I suggesting? Personally, I would love to see Google buy out or license the Kartoo technology and let users apply it to the Google database. Kartoo really is a very intelligent and useful keyword relevancy diagram tool.
(3) Recursive searching of previous-generation results.
For the longest time, I never knew Google had this ability. Why? Well... after your initial Google search, you only see the "Search within results" link at the BOTTOM of the results list. I feel this option should be available at both the top and bottom of the results list.
(4) Memetic Histography
Take a quick look at HitBrain.com. While far from "perfect", they seem to be doing the best job thus far at keyword frequency tracking. While perhaps "novelty", I think there is real demographics-research value in the following sort of functionality:
Allowing registered users to track relative frequencies of keyword/keyphrase data sets. By this, I mean that a person could, for example, keep an ongoing (daily/weekly/monthly/etc) table of the number of instances of certain search tokens. For example, "john lennon" vs "paul mccartney"...or "microsoft" vs "macintosh"...etc. I think anyone who qualifies as an information age demographer has a use for tracking (over time) relative frequencies of keywords and keyphrases. There is also some entertainment value in seeing how many instances of "good" there are relative to "evil", etc.
(5) ISO search engine syntax standards. I think it would be nice if there was an ISO standard for search engine syntax. I personally prefer Boolean searches to non-Boolean searches (especially when clustering of results is not available). I think that all search engines should accept an ISO syntax standard for searching that, at the very least, allows for advanced Boolean queries, and also, string-proximity-specifying (that is, results for "A" within X number of characters/words from "B", etc) capabilities. Wildcard-capable advanced Boolean and string-proximity-specifying are very useful functions, and would be nice to see ISOfied on all major search engines.
It troubles me that the +" " and -" " syntax doesn't work on all my favourite search engines.
(6) DNS search capabilities.
Take a look at WhoisReport.com (now Whois.sc) and see what it can do for you. I have yet to find a better resource for searching the actual DNS itself.
Some may frown on the searching of the DNS itself but, the truth is, to a respectable degree, the DNS itself has evolved into being a useful directory of sorts. Name Intelligence (the people behind Whois.sc) make their technology available as an API, and Google would be wise to add DNS search capabilities to their WWW search capabilities.
Just my $0.02
Michael Fischer
I like Pixar...I've followed them very closely since their inception. I do think, however, they should do the following: (1) Make a "LEGO-mation" film named "LEGOLAND", using state-of-the-art 3D computer animation tools. There are endless possibilities...and humour twists which could arise from the nature of how LEGO bricks lock together. LEGO computer software has been a hit...I see no reason why a cool LEGOLAND movie, done through computer animation ("LEGO-mation"), wouldn't also be a hit. (2) A sequel to TRON --Michael
Hello fellow Slashdotters. I am very pleased to see this newly-released report by Michael Geist. Several months ago, I got a very embittering crash-course in the UDRP process. The conclusion I arrived at is that the UDRP needs MAJOR REFORM. I am the registrant of the Tobacco.com domain name. I have been since 1995. Earlier this year, I received a "cease and desist" letter from a "company" calling itself "Tobacco.com, Inc.". This "entity" was nothing more than a bogus (as in fraudulent) culmination of several pieces of filled-out paperwork, in an attempt to superficially "legitimze" themselves. They attempted to reverse domain name hijack Tobacco.com, by way of their filing a UDRP against myself. To make a long story short... I immediately sought Counsel with John Berryhill, an expert-attorney in the area of trademark law and, one who has a great deal of experience with UDRP defense work. Seeking John Berryhill's aid was the best thing I could have possibly done in this case. On May 18th of this year, they withdrew their complaint against myself. (After seeing my response and realizing their fraud was easily uncovered.) My complaint, then? The UDRP makes it ALL TOO EASY for frivolous and fraudulent complaints to be brought forth. This means the UDRP can easily be used to effectively harass domain name registrants. I spent nearly $3500 defending myself against fraud which, if the UDRP was more intelligently crafted, would have never even been considered as a legitimate case. Personally, I think that generic terms (such as "tobacco") should be completely exempted from UDRP process. To add insult to injury, the NAF (the arbitration panel which was selected to hear the case) ended up keeping my $1250 three-person panel fee, EVEN THOUGH THE PANEL NEVER SAT! To me, that is criminal activity on the behalf of the NAF. ( The Register published a news item on this, specifically, at : http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/19217 .html )
I decided to organize all information related to my case, and publish my findings online. I only hope that what I've assembled can serve to help others who face UDRP injustices.
The casework can be seen at :
http://Tobacco.com/attempted-hijacking
Warmest Regards,
Michael Fischer