That was the spirit Steve and Woz began with: empower the hacker.
Why is Woz not in charge of his own high-power company? The world is not fair, I suppose.
It seems empowerment doesn't pay as well as enslavement.
The only thing Apple is controlling is what you can do to other people's devices. Frankly, from my point of view having to try and defend an enterprise and friends' and families' computer from malicious software, I'm very happy about this.
So you won't need to defend them from Google Voice...
It is in use if the virus wins. AIDS for instance. It's dormant if the the "junk DNA" does it's job correctly (error correction). Genes are the data. DNA is the par file. All that so called 'junk' is error correction and checksums.
As a web developer, I couldn't care less about installed base. If you have a browser, but never use it, I don't give two shits about you. I care about the guy shopping on my site. In that respect, statscounter's method is quite a bit more 'conclusive' because it measures usage, not installed base.
Or I could spend $599 for one without a contract, and still give AT&T a boatload of money.
And yet, you get a crippled phone, no matter how you pay.
How exactly is this a good deal?
If you think you're getting ripped off, try talking to developers who are dumping tens of thousands of dollars into developing iPhone apps only to have Apple tell them to take a hike.
I would agree that this is (now) a problem, but, certainly, the absence of free specs isn't the primary source of problems with HIPAA implementation, since the specifications have been available free.
Given that, it sounds like the "not gratis" problem is a symptom of a greater "not libre" problem. I'm going to go out on a limb here and wager that the price of the docs is just the tip of the iceberg.
Web apps must track changes (user management, breadcrumbs, back links, etc) from page to page. Otherwise they are of little utility. Web apps make pages stateful by tracking a session in one of two ways: Storing session IDs in cookies or URLs. Cookies can be secured with encryption. URLs are plaintext. Session URLs are like writing your pin number on your bank card. So... take your pick.
(There are actually other ways. But they suck worse: 1) Form value submission. *Everything* you click has to be a form with a hidden field to submit the session value... bye bye <a> tag. The forms also have to POST or the session will end up in the URL anyway... see above. 2) Javascript cookies... need I say more? 3) Flash cookies... I think other posters have already pointed out security flaws in this approach 4) some other approach with huge drawbacks? )
The pieces are in place; we just need leadership and focus to make something happen in a way that benefits the general welfare.
A good start would be making the specs free. At a minimum, it appears you must pay hundreds to thousands of dollars just to read the technical details of the standard. Feel free to correct me if you know where the transaction standards are published openly. I'd really love to see how the industry has managed to remain a clusterfvck for 12 years.
That's ridiculous. Unlike noxious-fume pollution, no one is in the least bit worried about the "local effects" of carbon dioxide. It already makes up billions of tons of atmosphere. It only does "damage" in the aggregate. The aggregate is all that matters.
Of course they do, which is why they are bad. What's your point?
It would seem to contradict what you said initially to some extent. The government is in the truck building business, but the competition is still winning. Indeed, this is what prompted me to make my initial reply:)
I feel like you think I'm being argumentative; I'm not trying to be.
Quite the contrary. You're one of the most sane, level headed posters I've encountered on/. in quite a while:)
When the government enters a market, it is at a competitive advantage as it is funded at least partially by tax dollars, which is revenue not linked to demand for its products.
I suggest you read up on instances where this has happened in the past
1930's Germany? Specific references to examples are always nice:)
The fact is that this almost always results in complete socialization of the industry and a loss of the private component, because private industry has to have such a superior product in order to overcome the competitive disadvantage of the demand-divorced tax revenue the public "competitor" enjoys.
By that logic, one might conclude the solution to our current economic crisis is to socialize industry. Then we would put our foreign competition out of business and bring our jobs back home in one action. No?
Why would they suddenly lose the American market? If the American free market failed to eliminate them, what makes you think the American government could do it?
If the government bought its civilian space needs exclusively from commercial suppliers "off the shelf" that would be a huge boost for commercial space industry
In an ideal world perhaps, but you're overlooking a major problem. The government would buy them at extremely inflated prices with no-bid contracts from companies like Halliburton.
Mil spec hammers don't cost $500. They cost $20, just like at Home Depot. The other $480 dissapears into a black ops project.
It would not surprise me if they really do cost $500. They would no doubt be Halliburton brand hammers and the other $480 disappears into Halliburton's pocket. Hammers sold through a no bid government contract of course. I mean, sure, they could spend it on some cool black ops thing. It just seems far easier, greedier, and much more likely that they would just pocket the money and say, "Fuck America, we're looking out for ourselves."
Sometimes benefit, as in the difference between survival and extintion, makes any cost worth of it. How much a life worth? and all/most lives in the planet?
Wow, no exaggeration there... Warmer weather is favorable to most life on this planet. Try being homeless for a little while and then honestly tell me you prefer hypothermia.
IE cannot even render the <q> tag correctly. That has been standard for more than a decade and would be _brain dead easy_ for them to support.
But now with IE's share dropping, MS apparently is starting to realize they need to catch up if they want to stay in the game as apps move into "the cloud".
The cloud, web 2.0... all just market speak. It's still just web hosting and javascript. What I see happening is the acceptance of "graceful degradation." The idea is that you create something and allow it to 'degrade gracefully' on browsers that cannot render things correctly. That's developer speak for "fsck IE. Were done supporting Microsoft's old and busted browser." Most of these 'Web 2.0' apps won't run otherwise. Naturally, when users start to see "graceful degradation" and can't use whatever site happens to be the new hotness, they upgrade to something that doesn't suck.
I am hoping it's true, because I'm tired of basically doubling my coding time just to work around IE's current shortcomings.
Good news/bad news. The bad news is IE 8 still sucks. It's truly awful. The good news is it won't matter. At the rate they're bleeding browser share, it won't matter. Just practice saying "Graceful degradation" a few times each morning in the mirror. (^_^)
I've got a coworker that is an IE fanatic. He keeps pointing out that IE uses less memory than FF, he's right. He also tallies up whenever I complain of a crash vs when he complains of one... and he's winning (as in fewer crashes).
I love being anti-m$, but you can't just dismiss their product as second-rate because you want it to be.
If firefox supported as little as IE, it would likely use much less memory. Is it not more appropriate to measure a browser by how well it supports the web standards that browsers are built to read? MS can't even be bothered to implement all of the standard html tags. IE 8 will finally support the frickin' <q> tag from HTML 4. That's a hard one too... replace the <q> tags with quote characters. It's rocket science really. No wonder it has taken MS more than a decade to support it. Next, run IE through a CSS support test page. Maybe give Acid3 a shot with it. Things aren't looking so pretty for IE, are they? Now try opening an XHTML page with it. Oh, sorry... IE is unable to read xhtml. It just downloads it to disk. It also doesn't support SVG, or MathML, or ruby. Firefox on the other hand, does.
Of course IE isn't second rate. It's not even good enough to qualify as third rate. I'm sure that's the primary reason MS is bleeding browser share at an accelerating rate.
Your logic in dismissing what is a valid question is surprisingly vitriolic, and equally incorrect.
It's "vitriolic" because it's replying to made-up bullshit that a certain subset of contrarians think is a-okay.
Funny, because it seems the only person producing "made-up bullshit" is you. AC is citing his sources, questioning the legitimacy of a claim, and actually doing some fact checking. You on the other hand are clearly pulling numbers out of your ass.
We get it. You can stop with the five paragraph rants now. You believe in global warming. You believe you're saving the world with your choice of light bulb. You believe it, just like Christians believe there's some magic man in the clouds judging them. You don't need references, science, data or math because you believe.
Slashdot Mirror
That was the spirit Steve and Woz began with: empower the hacker. Why is Woz not in charge of his own high-power company? The world is not fair, I suppose.
It seems empowerment doesn't pay as well as enslavement.
The only thing Apple is controlling is what you can do to other people's devices. Frankly, from my point of view having to try and defend an enterprise and friends' and families' computer from malicious software, I'm very happy about this.
So you won't need to defend them from Google Voice...
Oops... its, not it's.
It is in use if the virus wins. AIDS for instance. It's dormant if the the "junk DNA" does it's job correctly (error correction). Genes are the data. DNA is the par file. All that so called 'junk' is error correction and checksums.
Opera and Google are both able to accurately work out the size of their own user base using unique auto update hits. This would seem like a more conclusive method than your own. With this in mind Opera still has a third more users than Chrome globally.
As a web developer, I couldn't care less about installed base. If you have a browser, but never use it, I don't give two shits about you. I care about the guy shopping on my site. In that respect, statscounter's method is quite a bit more 'conclusive' because it measures usage, not installed base.
Where is the Android version?
+1
nobody knows about them because apple out marketed everyone
Did they? Or did they illegally leverage their monopoly in portable music devices to give themselves the advantage in a new market? :-)
Lets do a little math with AT&T's contract
Or I could spend $599 for one without a contract, and still give AT&T a boatload of money.
And yet, you get a crippled phone, no matter how you pay.
How exactly is this a good deal?
If you think you're getting ripped off, try talking to developers who are dumping tens of thousands of dollars into developing iPhone apps only to have Apple tell them to take a hike.
I would agree that this is (now) a problem, but, certainly, the absence of free specs isn't the primary source of problems with HIPAA implementation, since the specifications have been available free.
Given that, it sounds like the "not gratis" problem is a symptom of a greater "not libre" problem. I'm going to go out on a limb here and wager that the price of the docs is just the tip of the iceberg.
One that does not use cookies
Web apps must track changes (user management, breadcrumbs, back links, etc) from page to page. Otherwise they are of little utility. Web apps make pages stateful by tracking a session in one of two ways: Storing session IDs in cookies or URLs. Cookies can be secured with encryption. URLs are plaintext. Session URLs are like writing your pin number on your bank card. So ... take your pick.
(There are actually other ways. But they suck worse: 1) Form value submission. *Everything* you click has to be a form with a hidden field to submit the session value... bye bye <a> tag. The forms also have to POST or the session will end up in the URL anyway ... see above. 2) Javascript cookies... need I say more? 3) Flash cookies... I think other posters have already pointed out security flaws in this approach 4) some other approach with huge drawbacks? )
The pieces are in place; we just need leadership and focus to make something happen in a way that benefits the general welfare.
A good start would be making the specs free. At a minimum, it appears you must pay hundreds to thousands of dollars just to read the technical details of the standard. Feel free to correct me if you know where the transaction standards are published openly. I'd really love to see how the industry has managed to remain a clusterfvck for 12 years.
That's ridiculous. Unlike noxious-fume pollution, no one is in the least bit worried about the "local effects" of carbon dioxide. It already makes up billions of tons of atmosphere. It only does "damage" in the aggregate. The aggregate is all that matters.
Oh really?
Seriously? People are too lazy to go to the unemployment office? Why am I paying taxes again?
You were too lazy to hand deliver your first post on a velvet pillow to slashdot headquarters? Gosh, the nerve of some people...
> Massive bailouts don't constitute demand-divorced tax revenue?
Of course they do, which is why they are bad. What's your point?
It would seem to contradict what you said initially to some extent. The government is in the truck building business, but the competition is still winning. Indeed, this is what prompted me to make my initial reply :)
I feel like you think I'm being argumentative; I'm not trying to be.
Quite the contrary. You're one of the most sane, level headed posters I've encountered on /. in quite a while :)
When the government enters a market, it is at a competitive advantage as it is funded at least partially by tax dollars, which is revenue not linked to demand for its products.
Massive bailouts don't constitute demand-divorced tax revenue?
I suggest you read up on instances where this has happened in the past
1930's Germany? Specific references to examples are always nice :)
The fact is that this almost always results in complete socialization of the industry and a loss of the private component, because private industry has to have such a superior product in order to overcome the competitive disadvantage of the demand-divorced tax revenue the public "competitor" enjoys.
By that logic, one might conclude the solution to our current economic crisis is to socialize industry. Then we would put our foreign competition out of business and bring our jobs back home in one action. No?
since they would lose the American market.
Why would they suddenly lose the American market? If the American free market failed to eliminate them, what makes you think the American government could do it?
If the government bought its civilian space needs exclusively from commercial suppliers "off the shelf" that would be a huge boost for commercial space industry
In an ideal world perhaps, but you're overlooking a major problem. The government would buy them at extremely inflated prices with no-bid contracts from companies like Halliburton.
Correlation fallacy. If the government was in the truck building business, there wouldn't be lots of companies building trucks.
The Japanese and Germans will stop building truck because the American government stepped in and started building them?
Mil spec hammers don't cost $500. They cost $20, just like at Home Depot. The other $480 dissapears into a black ops project.
It would not surprise me if they really do cost $500. They would no doubt be Halliburton brand hammers and the other $480 disappears into Halliburton's pocket. Hammers sold through a no bid government contract of course. I mean, sure, they could spend it on some cool black ops thing. It just seems far easier, greedier, and much more likely that they would just pocket the money and say, "Fuck America, we're looking out for ourselves."
militarization of space.
You think that's scary, consider the militarization of the Cult of Climate Change. Cult leader Dr. James "Fake Data" Hansen with access to military command? That's much more frightening. There are factions of this cult that honestly believe, "We need to radically and intelligently reduce human populations to fewer than one billion" to stop global warming.
Clearly, your two option portrayal doesn't cover the actual depth of intellectual /. discussion typically found in an iPhone story.
Sometimes benefit, as in the difference between survival and extintion, makes any cost worth of it. How much a life worth? and all/most lives in the planet?
Wow, no exaggeration there... Warmer weather is favorable to most life on this planet. Try being homeless for a little while and then honestly tell me you prefer hypothermia.
Sure it renders HTML just fine
IE cannot even render the <q> tag correctly. That has been standard for more than a decade and would be _brain dead easy_ for them to support.
But now with IE's share dropping, MS apparently is starting to realize they need to catch up if they want to stay in the game as apps move into "the cloud".
The cloud, web 2.0... all just market speak. It's still just web hosting and javascript. What I see happening is the acceptance of "graceful degradation." The idea is that you create something and allow it to 'degrade gracefully' on browsers that cannot render things correctly. That's developer speak for "fsck IE. Were done supporting Microsoft's old and busted browser." Most of these 'Web 2.0' apps won't run otherwise. Naturally, when users start to see "graceful degradation" and can't use whatever site happens to be the new hotness, they upgrade to something that doesn't suck.
I am hoping it's true, because I'm tired of basically doubling my coding time just to work around IE's current shortcomings.
Good news/bad news. The bad news is IE 8 still sucks. It's truly awful. The good news is it won't matter. At the rate they're bleeding browser share, it won't matter. Just practice saying "Graceful degradation" a few times each morning in the mirror. (^_^)
I've got a coworker that is an IE fanatic. He keeps pointing out that IE uses less memory than FF, he's right. He also tallies up whenever I complain of a crash vs when he complains of one... and he's winning (as in fewer crashes).
I love being anti-m$, but you can't just dismiss their product as second-rate because you want it to be.
If firefox supported as little as IE, it would likely use much less memory. Is it not more appropriate to measure a browser by how well it supports the web standards that browsers are built to read? MS can't even be bothered to implement all of the standard html tags. IE 8 will finally support the frickin' <q> tag from HTML 4. That's a hard one too... replace the <q> tags with quote characters. It's rocket science really. No wonder it has taken MS more than a decade to support it. Next, run IE through a CSS support test page. Maybe give Acid3 a shot with it. Things aren't looking so pretty for IE, are they? Now try opening an XHTML page with it. Oh, sorry... IE is unable to read xhtml. It just downloads it to disk. It also doesn't support SVG, or MathML, or ruby. Firefox on the other hand, does.
Of course IE isn't second rate. It's not even good enough to qualify as third rate. I'm sure that's the primary reason MS is bleeding browser share at an accelerating rate.
It's "vitriolic" because it's replying to made-up bullshit that a certain subset of contrarians think is a-okay.
Funny, because it seems the only person producing "made-up bullshit" is you. AC is citing his sources, questioning the legitimacy of a claim, and actually doing some fact checking. You on the other hand are clearly pulling numbers out of your ass.
We get it. You can stop with the five paragraph rants now. You believe in global warming. You believe you're saving the world with your choice of light bulb. You believe it, just like Christians believe there's some magic man in the clouds judging them. You don't need references, science, data or math because you believe.