It's not going to happen, not in America, ever. Maybe the "desktop" will disappear, but the "home computer that contains everything " will not. Why? We don't like not being in control. There are problems with having a computer based on network computing: 1) It requires constant access to use; 2) You don't keep your data. Everyone likes having their Own Stuff, and desktops are not going to disappear for the same reason that people will never completely stop driving and start using public transportation. You want the freedom that desktop computers allow you: privacy, ease of use, and personalization. Who wants to be tethered to the internet all the time?
What I do see in the future is an easier way to store data online so that it is retreivable everywhere. Already many people don't use portable storage anymore - they just save it on the net and download it from wherever they are going. If network speed increases faster than our average file size, portable storage will disappear completely. And what's more is that you will probably have a large portion of your hard drive mirrored somewhere, or alternatively, people will learn to run servers (or they will be made easy to use) so they can download files themselves. Although this should be obvious already.
I pretty much read this as "teenager writes javascript in a gmail draft window and can run it in preview but cant send it anywhere." Not "Gmail doesn't filter out javascript from Yahoo!". Which now makes sense why it matters.
What does running Javascript "from gmail.com" even mean? Javascript is run on a client machine. So you can put Javascript in your code, and it will parrot it back to you. How exactly is this a security vulnerability? You could run the same code from anywhere - it doesn't have to be Gmail.com supplied Javascript code. Please correct me if I don't understand, but if he just got gmail to give him back his own javascript code, there is no vulnerability. How is it going to run "from the gmail servers"? And even if it COULD do that, how do we know gmail hasn't sandboxed it in some manner?
I should just post shit like "Hotmail.com vulnerability found!" all the time. Maybe I could garner this kind of media attention.
I didn't mean we should stop doing them; I was just confirming their place in the market as something for people who are easily persuaded, rather than a useful tool managers should be using.
It's a Serious Question. Don't TCO costs end up coming down to how much you will pay employees, how many employees you need, and the price of software? Shouldn't any capable manager be able to estimate the costs themselves? After all, I'm certain TCO varies wildly from workplace to workplace, considering what kind of system is already in place, what software is readily available for an OS, and what skills your current employees have.
My question is: is there really a use for these reports other than for 'defense': positive propaganda versus negative propaganda?
As an aside, do these studies take into account the availability and flexibility of currently extant software? Is there even a way to turn that information into TCO?
Doesn't anyone realize that Chinese people can EASILY use the English site? Yes, Google blocks its Chinese site - but the original link to google is right there, for anyone to click on and search for whatever pictures of tanks or democracy that you want. The censorship is an annoyance at best - far short of the "human rights violation" that everyone seems to be going on about.
You've already made the decision. You knew that coming to Slashdot, they'd tell you to put up an objection in a logical, courteous manner and stand up for your principles.
Wow, document classification with Bayes nets. How fresh is that??!
I wonder how many more of these we'll see? I liked this version better: http://www.pitchformula.com/
He took it a step further and actually MADE art based on those kinds of predictions.
Can you also make sure that it's not impossible to tell where the link to the story is?
You'll usually get stories like this:
Did you ever want to eat mashed potatoes without using your hands? Stupid Shit tells us that they have such a device that runs on Linux but violated the GPL and infringed patents blocking the DMCA from geek overlord insensitive clod Mircosoft sucks geeks don't have girlfriends. (there should be a slashdot loren ipsum)
that tends to be pretty confusing. the links aren't always in the order that I put them in and it gets pretty ambiguous. Sometimes the first or last link in that paragraph will be the Real Link.
God forbid the government use freely available standards. This is the death of IP!!!
Re:this book is unnecessary
on
Ajax in Action
·
· Score: 1
It is obvious once you know that the XMLHttpRequest command even exists - but knowing it exists is the hard part - it was added as an afterthought and it doesn't help that Javascript has absolute shit for documentation.
They are scared of breaking the DMCA. Do you honestly think any big antivirus company or even Microsoft is going to have the guts to provide software go in and remove a copyright-protection mechanism, something the DMCA explicity states you cannot do?
The only thing about Sony's size that matters is their ability to litigate.
True that both socialism and open source software both rely on the cooperation of several individuals for the good of the common good. However, open source software is not mandated by any group. If people want to make open source software, then they will, and if they don't, they won't. In that sense it is driven by the market. Socialism fails if people do not cooperate - that is not to say that open source software won't fail if people don't want to cooperate....but if you decide not to participate in a socialist society, you ruin it.
The difference is subtle, but basically it's a "do what you want" system versus a "do what you're told" system. Most people view socialism as bad because you have to do what you are told to a certain extent. Nobody's forcing anyone to use or make open source, and that's what makes it market-driven.
If two of the astronauts were having an affair and the child that resulted from the pregnancy was abandoned on the Martian landscape, and the advanced beings that lived their raised him as their own and he came back and revolutionzed the way that we think....
You should be able to return a product if it doesn't meet what you were promised by the vendor, unless it is explicitly stated at time of purchase that no refunds are acceptable. This is different than a warranty. This is also different than holding the programmer responsible for the results of its behavior.
My first comment was pointing out that if a programmer makes a mistake, the license that the user accepted before using the software says that there was no warranty or guarantee that the software wouldn't have mistakes. My second comment was pointing out that receiving compensation for the purchase of software was irrelevant to the argument.
What is really the issue here is when a mistake in the software harms someone. In that case, generally it will then have to fall on the consumer to prove some kind of malicious intent or gross negligence to provide proper warning of potential hazards to the average consumer of their product. This does not generally include security holes inserted into a program due to poor programming.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not going to happen, not in America, ever. Maybe the "desktop" will disappear, but the "home computer that contains everything " will not. Why? We don't like not being in control. There are problems with having a computer based on network computing: 1) It requires constant access to use; 2) You don't keep your data. Everyone likes having their Own Stuff, and desktops are not going to disappear for the same reason that people will never completely stop driving and start using public transportation. You want the freedom that desktop computers allow you: privacy, ease of use, and personalization. Who wants to be tethered to the internet all the time? What I do see in the future is an easier way to store data online so that it is retreivable everywhere. Already many people don't use portable storage anymore - they just save it on the net and download it from wherever they are going. If network speed increases faster than our average file size, portable storage will disappear completely. And what's more is that you will probably have a large portion of your hard drive mirrored somewhere, or alternatively, people will learn to run servers (or they will be made easy to use) so they can download files themselves. Although this should be obvious already.
I pretty much read this as "teenager writes javascript in a gmail draft window and can run it in preview but cant send it anywhere." Not "Gmail doesn't filter out javascript from Yahoo!". Which now makes sense why it matters.
i need to read faster
What does running Javascript "from gmail.com" even mean? Javascript is run on a client machine. So you can put Javascript in your code, and it will parrot it back to you. How exactly is this a security vulnerability? You could run the same code from anywhere - it doesn't have to be Gmail.com supplied Javascript code. Please correct me if I don't understand, but if he just got gmail to give him back his own javascript code, there is no vulnerability. How is it going to run "from the gmail servers"? And even if it COULD do that, how do we know gmail hasn't sandboxed it in some manner?
I should just post shit like "Hotmail.com vulnerability found!" all the time. Maybe I could garner this kind of media attention.
The Spaniards were thinking the same thing with the New World...
Can anybody tell me something...?
You can access Google.com free and uncensored from china; in fact there is even a link to it from Google.cn!!! Why is this even an issue???
If you can tell me, thanks.
Cane toads? I'd'a called 'em a 'chazwazzle'.
I didn't mean we should stop doing them; I was just confirming their place in the market as something for people who are easily persuaded, rather than a useful tool managers should be using.
It's a Serious Question. Don't TCO costs end up coming down to how much you will pay employees, how many employees you need, and the price of software? Shouldn't any capable manager be able to estimate the costs themselves? After all, I'm certain TCO varies wildly from workplace to workplace, considering what kind of system is already in place, what software is readily available for an OS, and what skills your current employees have.
My question is: is there really a use for these reports other than for 'defense': positive propaganda versus negative propaganda?
As an aside, do these studies take into account the availability and flexibility of currently extant software? Is there even a way to turn that information into TCO?
Doesn't anyone realize that Chinese people can EASILY use the English site? Yes, Google blocks its Chinese site - but the original link to google is right there, for anyone to click on and search for whatever pictures of tanks or democracy that you want. The censorship is an annoyance at best - far short of the "human rights violation" that everyone seems to be going on about.
You've already made the decision. You knew that coming to Slashdot, they'd tell you to put up an objection in a logical, courteous manner and stand up for your principles.
Wow, document classification with Bayes nets. How fresh is that??! I wonder how many more of these we'll see? I liked this version better: http://www.pitchformula.com/ He took it a step further and actually MADE art based on those kinds of predictions.
Sorry, I don't want to have to drill a hole in my head.
Can you also make sure that it's not impossible to tell where the link to the story is?
You'll usually get stories like this:
Did you ever want to eat mashed potatoes without using your hands? Stupid Shit tells us that they have such a device that runs on Linux but violated the GPL and infringed patents blocking the DMCA from geek overlord insensitive clod Mircosoft sucks geeks don't have girlfriends. (there should be a slashdot loren ipsum)
that tends to be pretty confusing. the links aren't always in the order that I put them in and it gets pretty ambiguous. Sometimes the first or last link in that paragraph will be the Real Link.
Good to hear that NIMH is still up and running after that last scandal. They do good work.
God forbid the government use freely available standards. This is the death of IP!!!
It is obvious once you know that the XMLHttpRequest command even exists - but knowing it exists is the hard part - it was added as an afterthought and it doesn't help that Javascript has absolute shit for documentation.
You want to learn the secret of AJAX? Here's everything you'll need to know without buying some technology-of-the-month (year?) book:
THE XMLHTTPRequest FUNCTION IN JAVASCRIPT DOWNLOADS SHIT
The rest should be obvious if you are a competent programmer.
They are scared of breaking the DMCA. Do you honestly think any big antivirus company or even Microsoft is going to have the guts to provide software go in and remove a copyright-protection mechanism, something the DMCA explicity states you cannot do?
The only thing about Sony's size that matters is their ability to litigate.
True that both socialism and open source software both rely on the cooperation of several individuals for the good of the common good. However, open source software is not mandated by any group. If people want to make open source software, then they will, and if they don't, they won't. In that sense it is driven by the market. Socialism fails if people do not cooperate - that is not to say that open source software won't fail if people don't want to cooperate....but if you decide not to participate in a socialist society, you ruin it.
The difference is subtle, but basically it's a "do what you want" system versus a "do what you're told" system. Most people view socialism as bad because you have to do what you are told to a certain extent. Nobody's forcing anyone to use or make open source, and that's what makes it market-driven.
Socialism is government-mandated. Open source software is market driven.
If two of the astronauts were having an affair and the child that resulted from the pregnancy was abandoned on the Martian landscape, and the advanced beings that lived their raised him as their own and he came back and revolutionzed the way that we think....
You should be able to return a product if it doesn't meet what you were promised by the vendor, unless it is explicitly stated at time of purchase that no refunds are acceptable. This is different than a warranty. This is also different than holding the programmer responsible for the results of its behavior.
My first comment was pointing out that if a programmer makes a mistake, the license that the user accepted before using the software says that there was no warranty or guarantee that the software wouldn't have mistakes. My second comment was pointing out that receiving compensation for the purchase of software was irrelevant to the argument.
What is really the issue here is when a mistake in the software harms someone. In that case, generally it will then have to fall on the consumer to prove some kind of malicious intent or gross negligence to provide proper warning of potential hazards to the average consumer of their product. This does not generally include security holes inserted into a program due to poor programming.
And goddammit, we're gonna make that as CPU efficient as we possbily can!
Fine. Go ahead and return my GPL software.