I wasn't arguing that Nokia wasn't tanking. Just that the chart sucked. I hate bad statistics and bad charts. Its like asking some one what the capital of the USA is and getting the response " 2+3= 7, therefore its washington DC".
That is one F-d up chart. It has three categories [apple], [nokia, samsung, lg], and [others]. You cannot conclude anything about any other company other than apple. Its the only one segregated out.
Who are "you guys" and what does this have to do with it not being funny?
Its not "not funny" because its offensive, its "not funny" because its "not funny" like a show on CBS.
I always buy the book at the cheapest price. Is that wrong? Sometimes its amazon, sometimes barnes & noble.
I'll admit they obviously made some mistakes, but I don't think the actual mistakes they made are that obvious. They started selling on-line pretty early. In my opinion, they were one of the first big name companies that understood the early e-commerce potential of the internet.
Im not saying the community can't or wont pick up the code. But it really says something to their security training that they in fact never checked the user had the authorization to perform a single action. That is the software equivalent of a one speed transmission.
No, you don't understand. Because the code is so bad: we cannot trust those that wrote it. Its not unfixable, but they did such a bad job writing it in the first place that we will not trust them in the future. In my car analogy, I might not junk the car and start over, but I might take it to a new dealer to rip out everything under the hood and put the real deal back in. Again, its about trust. Those who know what secure software looks like, do not trust them to write any future secure code.
Its like you hire some one to build you a custom car. He shows you his work in progress: Its got the body of a car, the inside is nicely done, the paint job is awesome, and you open the hood to find that the transmission only has one gear. Furthermore, the engine is from a go-cart. The battery: nine volt, hooked up in series with a lemon battery. Yeah, those are issues that can be fixed pretty easily. But do you really want the same guy to do it?
judging by the media, I'd say you're supposed to use twitter if you're ever in jail/kidnapped in a third world country. Then you'll be set free by a flashmob of justin berbers, only to discover you've just been punk'd.
For someone throwing around diagnosis of mental illnesses, you sure display a poor understanding of them. If everyone could just research a topic before pronouncing themselves an expert in it, we'd all be better off for it. Don't say what science is, with out studying science. Don't say what a particular religion teaches, without studying it. Don't diagnose mental illness, without studying psychology. Does that sound like a reasonably good plan?
I'm of the mind, that PHP would have been a better choice, simply because the libraries for it suck so much that they wouldn't rely on them.
There seem to be two schools of thoughts on how it would end up. You have the hotmail/ yahoo mail/gmail folks who think it will end up being a handfull of large players backing it. And you have the web hosting folk who think each implementation will be small. If its fewer larger players, you still have to fear for privacy, but not worry about the implementations. If its more smaller players, then you do have to worry about the ease of installation and upgrades.
I stil think it will be still born ala google wave.
This is getting a little frustrating and a little weird. No one has announced free hosting. No one will, until there is a demand for it. There won't be a demand for it until it takes off. I don't know why so many people assume it will take off. Its like watching a bunch of grade preschoolers argue about the sizes of their future yachts.
Bah, you didn't understand the point I was making.
This is the reference implementation. This will be the gold standard in the early days of the diaspora project, if it takes off. Now, if the main Diaspora service hits a bottleneck which requires them to seemlessly transition form say a ruby back end messaging system to a scala one or from Mysql to cassandra, then everyone else who's running the reference implementation will have to undergo those same procedures to make the upgrade to the next release.
That is all. I understand its a protocol as much as it is an implementation of a protocol. Just because that is the case, it doesn't mean you'll have hundreds of different implementations tomorrow to choose from. The initial one, will have to be a good one inorder to get user and developer buy in.
First of all, Twitter started out in Ruby, but really ran into sever problems very early in its growth. Its a poster child in for not using ruby to scale. Right now, its ruby only in the front end, the back end is scala. After many years of trying to make ruby scale, they gave up. Its been much more stable since they put scala in. I was hoping that a new company would be able to learn from the mistakes of a company like twitter.
Facebook, did a really, really good job. They used LAMP to its utmost potential, and deftly transitioned away from it. If you ask me, Facebook succeeded primarily because they did the scaling correctly. The load killed friendster, and hobbled myspace. Note they used PHP, not Zend Framework, or any other MVC.
So yeah, they could do it all in PHP, Ruby, python or similar. Point some what granted. Its just alarming that they seem to have embraced rails. I really think the key is to not over engineer, but also not use an existing framework that will stop you from growing very large. Considering that this is supposed to be a distributed system as well, any architecture changes that they make to the reference system would have to be duplicated by others.
No, there won't be a competing implementation, if the first one isn't capable of supporting a non-trivial load. This is social networking, you don't have any value associated with the product, until there is a sizeable user base.
However, there is always the danger that management falls in love with the the proof of concept, sales thinks its ready and promises it in two weeks. Then your "proof of concept" ends up getting shipped as the final product.
Ruby w/Rails is a very dangerous language to start a project like this in. Its very easy ( and tempting) to add in so many things that would be very difficult to scale. Its so easy to build a beautiful edifice on a house made of straw.
Seriously. That's a huge mistake., Scalability should be built into the core of it. Its okay if its just the interface, but the core of the app should be written in Scala, or Go. One can only hope that this is just a prototype that they will rewrite with a more solid base.
Man, you must have sucky friends. Facebook does facilitate actual social interaction for me. Really. I have 20 invites right now for actual things to do outside scheduled for the next week. Now, there are of course other ways to facilitate social interaction that doesn't involve facebook, or really the internet. But, it can be used correctly. So if people don't use it correctly who is to blame, them or the site? I've noticed my anti social friends have finally joined facebook. But they only play the stupid, stupid games. No posts on other users walls, no posts on theri walls, its like a cut a way view of their social less life. Which is sad, but that's an accurate picture of their real life and their real personality.
Too many lawyers?!? I find that to be slanderous, preposterous, and downright hippopotamus. I'll sue him for all the ipods in china! I'll sue china back into the stone age!
Slashdot Mirror
No. This is a Cross site Request Forgery attack. The Script in this case, was on the linked site, not in the tweet.
For those not in the know:
OWASP Cross Site Request Forgery Prevention sheet Sheet
I wasn't arguing that Nokia wasn't tanking. Just that the chart sucked. I hate bad statistics and bad charts. Its like asking some one what the capital of the USA is and getting the response " 2+3= 7, therefore its washington DC".
That is one F-d up chart. It has three categories [apple], [nokia, samsung, lg], and [others]. You cannot conclude anything about any other company other than apple. Its the only one segregated out.
Who are "you guys" and what does this have to do with it not being funny? Its not "not funny" because its offensive, its "not funny" because its "not funny" like a show on CBS.
I always buy the book at the cheapest price. Is that wrong? Sometimes its amazon, sometimes barnes & noble.
I'll admit they obviously made some mistakes, but I don't think the actual mistakes they made are that obvious. They started selling on-line pretty early. In my opinion, they were one of the first big name companies that understood the early e-commerce potential of the internet.
Why was Barnes and Noble stupid? I bought books from their website before I bought them from amazon.
Im not saying the community can't or wont pick up the code. But it really says something to their security training that they in fact never checked the user had the authorization to perform a single action. That is the software equivalent of a one speed transmission.
No, you don't understand. Because the code is so bad: we cannot trust those that wrote it. Its not unfixable, but they did such a bad job writing it in the first place that we will not trust them in the future. In my car analogy, I might not junk the car and start over, but I might take it to a new dealer to rip out everything under the hood and put the real deal back in. Again, its about trust. Those who know what secure software looks like, do not trust them to write any future secure code.
Its like you hire some one to build you a custom car. He shows you his work in progress: Its got the body of a car, the inside is nicely done, the paint job is awesome, and you open the hood to find that the transmission only has one gear. Furthermore, the engine is from a go-cart. The battery: nine volt, hooked up in series with a lemon battery. Yeah, those are issues that can be fixed pretty easily. But do you really want the same guy to do it?
judging by the media, I'd say you're supposed to use twitter if you're ever in jail/kidnapped in a third world country. Then you'll be set free by a flashmob of justin berbers, only to discover you've just been punk'd.
For someone throwing around diagnosis of mental illnesses, you sure display a poor understanding of them. If everyone could just research a topic before pronouncing themselves an expert in it, we'd all be better off for it. Don't say what science is, with out studying science. Don't say what a particular religion teaches, without studying it. Don't diagnose mental illness, without studying psychology. Does that sound like a reasonably good plan?
Yeah, but a large number of people will never do it. So anyone who does will probably get the mandatory cavity search.
I I've already said it a billion times by now, but if the first implementation sucks, then there won't be a second.
I'm of the mind, that PHP would have been a better choice, simply because the libraries for it suck so much that they wouldn't rely on them.
There seem to be two schools of thoughts on how it would end up. You have the hotmail/ yahoo mail/gmail folks who think it will end up being a handfull of large players backing it. And you have the web hosting folk who think each implementation will be small. If its fewer larger players, you still have to fear for privacy, but not worry about the implementations. If its more smaller players, then you do have to worry about the ease of installation and upgrades.
I stil think it will be still born ala google wave.
This is getting a little frustrating and a little weird. No one has announced free hosting. No one will, until there is a demand for it. There won't be a demand for it until it takes off. I don't know why so many people assume it will take off. Its like watching a bunch of grade preschoolers argue about the sizes of their future yachts.
Bah, you didn't understand the point I was making.
This is the reference implementation. This will be the gold standard in the early days of the diaspora project, if it takes off. Now, if the main Diaspora service hits a bottleneck which requires them to seemlessly transition form say a ruby back end messaging system to a scala one or from Mysql to cassandra, then everyone else who's running the reference implementation will have to undergo those same procedures to make the upgrade to the next release.
That is all. I understand its a protocol as much as it is an implementation of a protocol. Just because that is the case, it doesn't mean you'll have hundreds of different implementations tomorrow to choose from. The initial one, will have to be a good one inorder to get user and developer buy in.
First of all, Twitter started out in Ruby, but really ran into sever problems very early in its growth. Its a poster child in for not using ruby to scale. Right now, its ruby only in the front end, the back end is scala. After many years of trying to make ruby scale, they gave up. Its been much more stable since they put scala in. I was hoping that a new company would be able to learn from the mistakes of a company like twitter.
Facebook, did a really, really good job. They used LAMP to its utmost potential, and deftly transitioned away from it. If you ask me, Facebook succeeded primarily because they did the scaling correctly. The load killed friendster, and hobbled myspace. Note they used PHP, not Zend Framework, or any other MVC.
So yeah, they could do it all in PHP, Ruby, python or similar. Point some what granted. Its just alarming that they seem to have embraced rails. I really think the key is to not over engineer, but also not use an existing framework that will stop you from growing very large. Considering that this is supposed to be a distributed system as well, any architecture changes that they make to the reference system would have to be duplicated by others.
No, there won't be a competing implementation, if the first one isn't capable of supporting a non-trivial load. This is social networking, you don't have any value associated with the product, until there is a sizeable user base.
That is of course 100% true.
However, there is always the danger that management falls in love with the the proof of concept, sales thinks its ready and promises it in two weeks. Then your "proof of concept" ends up getting shipped as the final product.
Ruby w/Rails is a very dangerous language to start a project like this in. Its very easy ( and tempting) to add in so many things that would be very difficult to scale. Its so easy to build a beautiful edifice on a house made of straw.
Seriously. That's a huge mistake., Scalability should be built into the core of it. Its okay if its just the interface, but the core of the app should be written in Scala, or Go. One can only hope that this is just a prototype that they will rewrite with a more solid base.
Singles FT*W* ( For the *Whoosh*)
Its okay to *whoosh* someone based on a 18 year old indi film, right?
Man, you must have sucky friends. Facebook does facilitate actual social interaction for me. Really. I have 20 invites right now for actual things to do outside scheduled for the next week. Now, there are of course other ways to facilitate social interaction that doesn't involve facebook, or really the internet. But, it can be used correctly. So if people don't use it correctly who is to blame, them or the site? I've noticed my anti social friends have finally joined facebook. But they only play the stupid, stupid games. No posts on other users walls, no posts on theri walls, its like a cut a way view of their social less life. Which is sad, but that's an accurate picture of their real life and their real personality.
Its like my band "Citizen Dick", you may not have heard it but we are loved in Belgium.
I remember it containing
Too many lawyers?!? I find that to be slanderous, preposterous, and downright hippopotamus. I'll sue him for all the ipods in china! I'll sue china back into the stone age!