Seriously. 'Framework' part is just a wrapper around a whole, full fledged Chrome browser. And there's your problem. If you have Atom, Slack and any other Electron app, along with your 'regular' Chrome, you have *four* copies of Chrome on your computer. If you think that is silly, yes. It is.
Which is why it's crazy to run any Electron app that is available on the web. Run Slack in Chrome, pin the tab, enable notifications and that's it. Identical, and one less Chrome installation.
I was involved in a similar project, but we couldn't get the funding to do it properly. This is where we got to some two years ago (hence use of Flash), before management drove us to the ground:
Just out of curiosity, have you downloaded android OS, modified it and installed it on your incredible? What have you done on your incredible that can't be done on the iPhone due to it being open? Not trying to flame here, Im just curious...
Not the original poster, but I'll offer my story. A couple of days ago, I got an unsigned non-Market app (actually it is on the Market, just not in my territory) via email. Signed it myself using free tools and installed it on the phone. As far as I know, can't be done on iPhone. Also, as I use multiple computers, on any of them I can, using standard USB cable and OS file management, access any file (music/video/apps/whatever) on the phone. And copy anything from the computer to the phone, and use it on the phone. Unlike with iPhone, no extra software necessary, no warranties voided, not subject to approval by 3rd party.
Also, I'm about to start development of an application for Android. No code exists yet, and already I know my app can be published. I couldn't be sure with the iPhone. Google may reject the app from the Android Market, but I can still put it up on the web and have people be able to install and run it. Furthermore, I have a sizable amout of development investment in Adobe Flash. As of this summer (June or so) I will be able to leverage that existing codebase and development process to make Android apps. That just won't happen on iPhone.
I guess the last two things don't mean much to you if you're not a developer, but at least living without market lockdown and file lockdown is something that should be appealing to anyone.
Then get an unrestricted device. As vocal as some "freedom lovers" are there should be a market for such a thing. Put your money where your mouth is!
And so I did. Bought myself an Android phone. With a nifty 'Allow instalation of non-Market applications' checkbox. I still use Android market. But I don't have to. And yes, when I connect my phone to any computer, without any additional software, I see all its files. And can copy any file to or from the device wihout it having to be aproved by a third party (iTunes). You know, an open system, freedom and all that.:-)
Those guys got lucky and milked a highly publicized privacy issue with Facebook at just the right time. If there was a website for betting against startups, I would bet against Diaspora ever going anywhere.
Well, even if it's only that, at least there is one thing clear. There is a significant demand for a social network where the main motivation of the owner/operator is not vacuuming private data to be sold to advertisers. The fact that everyday people, not VCs, banks or funds, are willing to put up almost $200k on mere promise of such a system is bound to get a lot of people thinking. Even if these guys fail miserably and bever be heard from again, the folks at Facebook should take this as very very bad news. Or very very good news, if you're a user.:-)
Yes, diaspora primarily refers to the Jewish dispersal across the globe as a result of the Roman occupation and destruction of the Jewish commonwealth in the land of Israel.
Well, maybe in your culture. In mine (I'm from Croatia) it refers generally to people living outside of their homeland, not any particular nationality. We had large emigration in first half of the last century, and those who left the country are usually refered to as 'diaspora'.
But, yeah, it's probably not the best choice for a name. Although I can understand the motivation, with their network being made of dispersed nodes they call 'seeds'.
But Flash sucks the electrical life out of mobile devices. This isn't theory, it's fact. Take your laptop off AC power and see it die after a few YouTube videos or Flash games.
Yeah, those flash videos really do eat at the battery. What with their h.264 encoded content and all. Things will be so much better once we switch to HTML5 and its h.264 encoded content. So much better. Down with Flash, the electricity vampire!
BTW, the major advancement with the flash 10.1 for mobiles (which is what the article is about) is that it will use native hardvare for decoding video and drawing primitives with GPU.
The problem is not in the idea. Indeed cpu cycles, storage and bandwidth are worth something and if anyone building a datacentre scale operation will tell you just how expensive per unit it actually is.
And, despite that, the old TPB managed to get millions to contribute bandwidth and storage space to their 'cloud', with no monetary compensation whatsoever. So, obviously, it is possible, and it does work.
What happens when the only guy with the last 10% of my file isn't online?
Nothing. You don't get the files, But, then again, that means the operators of the service are complete dumbasses who didn't think to host at least one complete copy of the data on their servers. Idiots. And the guys that bankrolled them, morons. So, let's hope they actually think about their bussiness plan for more than five minutes, eh?
The last thing anyone wants is to host other peoples data with an open pipe to a commercial web site.
Guess what? Whenever you're seeding a torrent, you're doing exactly that. And thousands upon thousands of people are jumping at a chance to do it. And they usually get absolutely noting in return (except maybe a better ratio somewhere).
What if that 'other peoples data' was a Battlestar Galactica Season 4, that you already have on your disk right now? And, possibly, currently already seeding like mad so you'll get your ratio up on some private tracker?
And you could certainly restrict them to paid accounts.
But why would anyone want to pay for what they can get better for free?
Pirated torrents wouldn't be better if the new TPB offered the same selection and the same quality. It just wouldn't be free, but I bet a lot of people would trade free for legit, if the pricing is anywhere near reasonable. Throw in a possibility of discount if you seed the files, and it becomes even more interesting.
People buy millions of tracks off of iTunes, and they could all get them for free.
Yep. Also, I'm not aware of any part of the bittorrent protocol that provides the facilities for payments etc. that they're fantasising about. No one is going to give up their myriad bittorrent clients for some unproven and proprietary p2p system by the people who destroyed their favourite site, even if its free. And if it's not proprietary, it'll be forked to remove the paytard stuff.
I have no clear idea of their bussiness model, but I can certainly imagine the way it _could_ be done. Have plain old vanilla private torrent site. You can accurately track who DLs and ULs what. Your ratio is a price divider. So, if you UL 4x as much as you DL, you pay 1/4 of the monthly fee. And if the monthly fee is something reasonable to begin with, and they had a library of titles comparable to what TPB today has, I bet a lot of people would just jump at the chance.
So not only are the BBC paying for their bandwidth, and users are paying through the nose for a pretty limited service, BT now want to double dip and charge twice for the same content, with the BBC picking up the bill instead of the customers.
Instead? Nope. They want to charge at BOTH ends of the pipe, server AND consumer. That's like charging you for recieving calls on your mobile because lots of people want to talk to you. Why isn't anyone framing the problem like this? Then it becomes crystal clear what kind of idiocy their demand is.
I pay a monthly fee for for my DSL service, which includes flat rate transfers. So, any bytes that come down the pipe, wherever they come from, their transfer is already paid. The ISP isn't providing the BBC a free service. It's providing a paid service to me, the person who watches BBC content.
This alone is a reason for me to avoid it, and recommend you to do so too.
Dude, you forgot to rant about Wolframs ego. C'mon, if you're going to completely ignore the actual merits of the product at hand, at least do it proprely.
I don't have an advice regartding the particular language choice, but with you beeing an engineer, I have a great advice regarding the technique: Spaced repetition.
Absolutely the best way to hack your brain to acquire as much vocabulary in as little time as possible.
Not only that, but the unelected asshats even get to decide *who* can be voted into the democratic half.
Sorta like when a Supreme Court (an unelected bunch of, well, for the sake of analogy, asshats) decides who will be the president, overriding the majority of the people expressed by a direct vote. Doesn't that sound like a sham democracy too? In Iran at least the person who gets most of the votes actually gets elected.
Jeez, Can someone please give me the short version explanation about why everyone is bagging on Wolfram?
Well, the very short version is that he is not a very nice person. And, basically, he said 'fuck you' to the traditional scientific community and went his separate way, turning from a prodigy to an outlaw. Which the traditional scientific community didn't appreciate much. And now they are, more or less, openly out to get him.
Which is, IMHO, unfortunate, because his scientific ideas should be judged on their merits alone.
Sure. Probably all of them, 7 years from now.:-) The probability of world economy tanking aside, it's reasonable to assume that launches will cost less 7 years from now.
Besides, could you get away with something even lighter than Falcon9? You can get 750kg to LEO for $7-$8 mil today, on Falcon 1. From LEO, would it be possible to use an ion drive to get to Moon orbit? I don't know if delta-v needed to get there is achievable with an ion drive in realistic time-frame, but even if it takes 6 months, so what, the rover wouldn't mind. Or am I totally off base here?
Umm, think again... Currently, Russia holds the third largest money reserves in the world. They are running budget surpluses for seven years straight (thanks to oil & gas prices), last year they ended up $100+ billion in the black. Meanwhile, the US is close to $900 billion in the red. So, as far as credit goes, the US could be considered sub-prime market, unlike the russians, who would have a number of platinum cards to choose from.
Re:Maybe there's a silver lining here...
on
Storm Worm Rising
·
· Score: 1
If the problem were easily solvable, it would have been solved long ago. There is no financial incentive for Redmond to produce a invulnerable OS...
Barking up a wrong tree, dude.
This thing is a trojan, OS has nothing to do with it. User decided to run the malicious program.
But, I agree with your conclusion. Those responsible should be held accountable. Users that trojaned their machines should be cut off from the net, possibly even fined.
Re:Maybe there's a silver lining here...
on
Storm Worm Rising
·
· Score: 1
(1) the idiots in congress do not have a clue as to what a botnet is and therefore are incapable of creating anything remotely usable;
Well, I'm sure that someone is able to explain it to them. If noone else, then Googles lobbyists.
(2) the average user would not know why his computer cannot access the internet;
Maybe user support could clue him in? If he's doesn't care to call them up, then he doesn't need connectivity anyways.
(3) many flat out refuse to learn good online habits until forced to and even then they will fight to the bitter end.
So? We should just let them carry on being assholes? Just bend over and take it?
I wonder how grandma and grandpa will feel when get a letter in the mail to discover that there internet they use to only check mails from the kids/grandkids has been hijacked by a worm that they never heard about and now have to pay fines to cover damages.
Well, maybe they will then realise that a computer can be a nuisance for others, and learn to treat it as such. Owning a computer is a responsibilty.
I am in favour of some form of punishment for zombied computers for some time now. You would be fined with no questions if you blocked the street with your parked car, granpa or not. Why is someone who blocked internet access for others treated differently?
Re:Microsoft is going to lose big
on
Storm Worm Rising
·
· Score: 4, Informative
If they can't find a way to reach customers and get them fixes for the rampant insecurity of these machines that are compromised.
WTF are you talking about? RTFA, please. If you actually did that before funboying around, you'd notice that the program in question is not a worm at all, but a trojan. User has to manually run the attachment, probably clicking through a couple of dialogs practically begging him not to. But, since the user really, really _wants_ to see the cute kittens, or a naked celebrity, or whatever the trojan claims to be, trojan will be run. No OS can defend against the user being a sucker.
So, move along, please. Your tirade is totally off topic here.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously. 'Framework' part is just a wrapper around a whole, full fledged Chrome browser. And there's your problem. If you have Atom, Slack and any other Electron app, along with your 'regular' Chrome, you have *four* copies of Chrome on your computer. If you think that is silly, yes. It is.
Which is why it's crazy to run any Electron app that is available on the web. Run Slack in Chrome, pin the tab, enable notifications and that's it. Identical, and one less Chrome installation.
I was involved in a similar project, but we couldn't get the funding to do it properly. This is where we got to some two years ago (hence use of Flash), before management drove us to the ground:
http://www.geanium.com/demo_content/Rome/
Content is in croatian, but you'll get the idea.
Just out of curiosity, have you downloaded android OS, modified it and installed it on your incredible? What have you done on your incredible that can't be done on the iPhone due to it being open? Not trying to flame here, Im just curious...
Not the original poster, but I'll offer my story. A couple of days ago, I got an unsigned non-Market app (actually it is on the Market, just not in my territory) via email. Signed it myself using free tools and installed it on the phone. As far as I know, can't be done on iPhone. Also, as I use multiple computers, on any of them I can, using standard USB cable and OS file management, access any file (music/video/apps/whatever) on the phone. And copy anything from the computer to the phone, and use it on the phone. Unlike with iPhone, no extra software necessary, no warranties voided, not subject to approval by 3rd party.
Also, I'm about to start development of an application for Android. No code exists yet, and already I know my app can be published. I couldn't be sure with the iPhone. Google may reject the app from the Android Market, but I can still put it up on the web and have people be able to install and run it. Furthermore, I have a sizable amout of development investment in Adobe Flash. As of this summer (June or so) I will be able to leverage that existing codebase and development process to make Android apps. That just won't happen on iPhone.
I guess the last two things don't mean much to you if you're not a developer, but at least living without market lockdown and file lockdown is something that should be appealing to anyone.
Then get an unrestricted device. As vocal as some "freedom lovers" are there should be a market for such a thing. Put your money where your mouth is!
And so I did. Bought myself an Android phone. With a nifty 'Allow instalation of non-Market applications' checkbox. I still use Android market. But I don't have to. And yes, when I connect my phone to any computer, without any additional software, I see all its files. And can copy any file to or from the device wihout it having to be aproved by a third party (iTunes). You know, an open system, freedom and all that. :-)
Those guys got lucky and milked a highly publicized privacy issue with Facebook at just the right time. If there was a website for betting against startups, I would bet against Diaspora ever going anywhere.
Well, even if it's only that, at least there is one thing clear. There is a significant demand for a social network where the main motivation of the owner/operator is not vacuuming private data to be sold to advertisers. The fact that everyday people, not VCs, banks or funds, are willing to put up almost $200k on mere promise of such a system is bound to get a lot of people thinking. Even if these guys fail miserably and bever be heard from again, the folks at Facebook should take this as very very bad news. Or very very good news, if you're a user. :-)
Yes, diaspora primarily refers to the Jewish dispersal across the globe as a result of the Roman occupation and destruction of the Jewish commonwealth in the land of Israel.
Well, maybe in your culture. In mine (I'm from Croatia) it refers generally to people living outside of their homeland, not any particular nationality. We had large emigration in first half of the last century, and those who left the country are usually refered to as 'diaspora'.
But, yeah, it's probably not the best choice for a name. Although I can understand the motivation, with their network being made of dispersed nodes they call 'seeds'.
But Flash sucks the electrical life out of mobile devices. This isn't theory, it's fact. Take your laptop off AC power and see it die after a few YouTube videos or Flash games.
Yeah, those flash videos really do eat at the battery. What with their h.264 encoded content and all. Things will be so much better once we switch to HTML5 and its h.264 encoded content. So much better. Down with Flash, the electricity vampire!
BTW, the major advancement with the flash 10.1 for mobiles (which is what the article is about) is that it will use native hardvare for decoding video and drawing primitives with GPU.
The problem is not in the idea. Indeed cpu cycles, storage and bandwidth are worth something and if anyone building a datacentre scale operation will tell you just how expensive per unit it actually is.
And, despite that, the old TPB managed to get millions to contribute bandwidth and storage space to their 'cloud', with no monetary compensation whatsoever. So, obviously, it is possible, and it does work.
What happens when the only guy with the last 10% of my file isn't online?
Nothing. You don't get the files, But, then again, that means the operators of the service are complete dumbasses who didn't think to host at least one complete copy of the data on their servers. Idiots. And the guys that bankrolled them, morons. So, let's hope they actually think about their bussiness plan for more than five minutes, eh?
Because the additional read/write/seek time involved would kill the lifetimes of your disks.
No, it wouldn't. Says Google. Look it up.
Couldn't have put it better.
The last thing anyone wants is to host other peoples data with an open pipe to a commercial web site.
Guess what? Whenever you're seeding a torrent, you're doing exactly that. And thousands upon thousands of people are jumping at a chance to do it. And they usually get absolutely noting in return (except maybe a better ratio somewhere).
you will store other peoples data on my machine?
What if that 'other peoples data' was a Battlestar Galactica Season 4, that you already have on your disk right now? And, possibly, currently already seeding like mad so you'll get your ratio up on some private tracker?
OK, sign me up.
Indeed.
And you could certainly restrict them to paid accounts.
But why would anyone want to pay for what they can get better for free?
Pirated torrents wouldn't be better if the new TPB offered the same selection and the same quality. It just wouldn't be free, but I bet a lot of people would trade free for legit, if the pricing is anywhere near reasonable. Throw in a possibility of discount if you seed the files, and it becomes even more interesting.
People buy millions of tracks off of iTunes, and they could all get them for free.
Yep. Also, I'm not aware of any part of the bittorrent protocol that provides the facilities for payments etc. that they're fantasising about. No one is going to give up their myriad bittorrent clients for some unproven and proprietary p2p system by the people who destroyed their favourite site, even if its free. And if it's not proprietary, it'll be forked to remove the paytard stuff.
I have no clear idea of their bussiness model, but I can certainly imagine the way it _could_ be done. Have plain old vanilla private torrent site. You can accurately track who DLs and ULs what. Your ratio is a price divider. So, if you UL 4x as much as you DL, you pay 1/4 of the monthly fee. And if the monthly fee is something reasonable to begin with, and they had a library of titles comparable to what TPB today has, I bet a lot of people would just jump at the chance.
So not only are the BBC paying for their bandwidth, and users are paying through the nose for a pretty limited service, BT now want to double dip and charge twice for the same content, with the BBC picking up the bill instead of the customers.
Instead? Nope. They want to charge at BOTH ends of the pipe, server AND consumer. That's like charging you for recieving calls on your mobile because lots of people want to talk to you. Why isn't anyone framing the problem like this? Then it becomes crystal clear what kind of idiocy their demand is.
I pay a monthly fee for for my DSL service, which includes flat rate transfers. So, any bytes that come down the pipe, wherever they come from, their transfer is already paid. The ISP isn't providing the BBC a free service. It's providing a paid service to me, the person who watches BBC content.
This alone is a reason for me to avoid it, and recommend you to do so too.
Dude, you forgot to rant about Wolframs ego. C'mon, if you're going to completely ignore the actual merits of the product at hand, at least do it proprely.
I don't have an advice regartding the particular language choice, but with you beeing an engineer, I have a great advice regarding the technique: Spaced repetition.
Absolutely the best way to hack your brain to acquire as much vocabulary in as little time as possible.
Not only that, but the unelected asshats even get to decide *who* can be voted into the democratic half.
Sorta like when a Supreme Court (an unelected bunch of, well, for the sake of analogy, asshats) decides who will be the president, overriding the majority of the people expressed by a direct vote. Doesn't that sound like a sham democracy too? In Iran at least the person who gets most of the votes actually gets elected.
Jeez, Can someone please give me the short version explanation about why everyone is bagging on Wolfram?
Well, the very short version is that he is not a very nice person. And, basically, he said 'fuck you' to the traditional scientific community and went his separate way, turning from a prodigy to an outlaw. Which the traditional scientific community didn't appreciate much. And now they are, more or less, openly out to get him.
Which is, IMHO, unfortunate, because his scientific ideas should be judged on their merits alone.
Got any launchers cheaper than the Falcons?
:-) The probability of world economy tanking aside, it's reasonable to assume that launches will cost less 7 years from now.
Sure. Probably all of them, 7 years from now.
Besides, could you get away with something even lighter than Falcon9? You can get 750kg to LEO for $7-$8 mil today, on Falcon 1. From LEO, would it be possible to use an ion drive to get to Moon orbit? I don't know if delta-v needed to get there is achievable with an ion drive in realistic time-frame, but even if it takes 6 months, so what, the rover wouldn't mind. Or am I totally off base here?
I don't think they have a big enough credit card.
Umm, think again... Currently, Russia holds the third largest money reserves in the world. They are running budget surpluses for seven years straight (thanks to oil & gas prices), last year they ended up $100+ billion in the black. Meanwhile, the US is close to $900 billion in the red. So, as far as credit goes, the US could be considered sub-prime market, unlike the russians, who would have a number of platinum cards to choose from.
If the problem were easily solvable, it would have been solved long ago. There is no financial incentive for Redmond to produce a invulnerable OS ...
Barking up a wrong tree, dude.
This thing is a trojan, OS has nothing to do with it. User decided to run the malicious program.
But, I agree with your conclusion. Those responsible should be held accountable. Users that trojaned their machines should be cut off from the net, possibly even fined.
(1) the idiots in congress do not have a clue as to what a botnet is and therefore are incapable of creating anything remotely usable;
Well, I'm sure that someone is able to explain it to them. If noone else, then Googles lobbyists.
(2) the average user would not know why his computer cannot access the internet;
Maybe user support could clue him in? If he's doesn't care to call them up, then he doesn't need connectivity anyways.
(3) many flat out refuse to learn good online habits until forced to and even then they will fight to the bitter end.
So? We should just let them carry on being assholes? Just bend over and take it?
I wonder how grandma and grandpa will feel when get a letter in the mail to discover that there internet they use to only check mails from the kids/grandkids has been hijacked by a worm that they never heard about and now have to pay fines to cover damages.
Well, maybe they will then realise that a computer can be a nuisance for others, and learn to treat it as such. Owning a computer is a responsibilty.
I am in favour of some form of punishment for zombied computers for some time now. You would be fined with no questions if you blocked the street with your parked car, granpa or not. Why is someone who blocked internet access for others treated differently?
If they can't find a way to reach customers and get them fixes for the rampant insecurity of these machines that are compromised.
WTF are you talking about? RTFA, please. If you actually did that before funboying around, you'd notice that the program in question is not a worm at all, but a trojan. User has to manually run the attachment, probably clicking through a couple of dialogs practically begging him not to. But, since the user really, really _wants_ to see the cute kittens, or a naked celebrity, or whatever the trojan claims to be, trojan will be run. No OS can defend against the user being a sucker.
So, move along, please. Your tirade is totally off topic here.