How and why would a 5-year old story about bankruptcy suddenly get "voted up" in at the South Florida Sun-Sentinel so that news aggregators (and google-bot) would pick it up? Sounds very suspicious to me.
So are you telling me that I could set up a "click-bot" to vote up old-news and make myself rich in the ensuing mayhem?
POSIX Standard? Then its not "Bash"
on
Bash Cookbook
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
The review says, "They also use the POSIX standard, so that all of the examples are portable across platforms."
So if the book and examples limit themselves to the POSIX subset of bash's capabilities and don't go into the GNU extensions, is the book really about "bash"? It sounds like the book could be called "UNIX shell cookbook" (oops already done) or "Ksh Cookbook" just as much as "Bash Cookbook". But of course, bash is the Linux default and Linux is hot while Unix is passe.
I always thought it was the gnu extensions above and beyond POSIX (while staying backwards capatable with POSIX) that make the gnu tools like bash and gawk so much (allegedly) better than ksh and awk.
BTW, I use bash because it is the default on most linux systems so I am familiar with it. Bash is the very first thing I install on BSD or Solaris systems and then I set it as my login shell. It's actually really rare that I need to call on the gnu extensions, so I could probably be happy with pdksh just as well.
I don't see why the package manager (rpm/yum or deb/apt or whatever) can't keep track of the base system and utilities being in/bin and/usr/bin and then putting applications like openoffice or xpdf into either opt or/usr/local. Even then, I would still prefer that each app have its own discrete directory like/opt/appName/bin for the programs and opt/appName/etc for the config files instead of the common practice of mixing up different programs into a single bin directory.
For example, when I compile Apache, I don't dump the httpd into/usr/local/bin and the httpd.conf into/usr/local/etc, I put them into/usr/local/apache/bin and/usr/local/apache/conf respectively (which actually the apache default anyway). I think package manager should do the same and put "optional" package into/opt/appName
All the distrubtions use the same basic set of Gnu tools (like GCC, binutils, bash) and common programs like the perl binary. So why not have all the contemporaneous (i.e. released in the same time-frame) distros use the same tools? Shuttleworth was basically advocating an extended version of this (although he phrased it in terms of a coordinated release cycle) to be policy across several distros and to include higher-level applications like GNOME, KDE, and OO (besides the low level stuff like binutils).
As I've said before, software vendors like Oracle would love this because it would simplify their support.
Now if only LSB would stop the cluttering of/usr/bin with non-system programs and put user install apps in/usr/local or/opt where they belong.;)
Sure, if by "save" you mean "appropriate for exclusive use".
Yes, the fall of the Roman Empire immediately preceded the Dark Ages. However, problem of the Dark Ages was not so much that there was no central empire to act as a beacon of light, but more that education and knowledge was available only to the clergy (and the wealthy, via the clergy). It is very telling that the Renaissance only began with the translation of the Bible into a common tongue, instead of being exclusively in Latin - that only priests could read.
It sounds like you are accusing the Church of suppressing education and civilization. Are you saying the collaspe of education and civilization had nothing to do with that whole burning and pillaging thing from the pagan barbarian hordes such as the Goths and Vandals? As far as the availability of education, I doubt the tillers of the land in the Late Empire were anymore literate than the tillers of the land in the Dark Ages. What did happen is that trade was choked off and the economy collapsed as a result of a bunch of petty barbarians chieftans destroying the political and economic unity of the Empire. The literate magister of the latin villa (ruling class) was replaced with an illiterate german lord of the manor
The old educated economic classes were destroyed and disposed by the germans. The Church was the only educated class left, but by accident and not by their own design. They were "exclusively" educated because they provided education themselves internally, not because they choked it off to the rest of the world. The church held it togather as best they could. They were certainly not responsible for the advent of Dark Ages as you seem to imply.
This is mostly a repost of some things I wrote a few years back, but this should serve as a cautionary tale about computer models and science. This device could "scientifically" prove geo-centrism in the sense of being valid science according to the scientific method.
Valid reproducable observations that lead to a hypothesis and valid proven predictions does not make it "true". Based upon the Article, the Greeks used this to *accurately* predict the positions of planets. This meets all four steps of our modern scientific method.
Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of phenomena. The Greeks see the planets, moon, and sun move across the sky
Formulation of an hypothesis to explain the phenomena. The Greeks form a geo-centric hypothosis "in which each body describes a circle (the epicycle) around a point that itself moves in a circle around the earth"
Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations. The Greeks build a mental model of the universe to predict where the the heavenly bodies will be in the sky and then build a device (computer model) that will execute their prediction.
Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments. The Greeks can run the machine over and over and every time come up with a reasonably accurate prediction that can be verified by going back and seeing that the phenomena conforms to the prediction of the computer model
So, does this mean that a geocentric universe was "proven" by science in the 1st century BC? We would say that was absurd because we have more information about the universe now than the Greeks had from just looking skyward. But how many other computer models and predictions do we take on faith as "science" which are based on incomplete information. Our best global warming climate models are extemely *inaccurate* compared to this relatively accurate device. Yet we accept the (modern) inaccurate models on faith and reject the (ancient) accurate model that this device "proves".
So my point here is that "scientific" computer models should be greeted with skepticism, even when they accurately predict. They should be absolutely scorned when they fail to accurately predict. There are a whole bunch of "scientists" out there running computer similations that are far less predictive than this device that is likey based on a geocentric theory of the universe.
SCOsource also open sourced "Ancient Unix". This supposedly unencumbered the orginal classic vi, which is widely used (according to the oracle of true that is wikipedia). Now it might be encumbered again. Time to check the CVS repositories and see which version you are shipping.
Fourtunately, there are lots of libre free alternates (like nvi and vim).
SCO got off easy... this time. But the next shoe to drop will be if Novell sues Sun over OpenSolaris and Sun invokes the indemnity clause in its agreement with SCO. Then SCO will be on the hook.
The current judgment of $2.5M is practically nominal in the big picture. A large investor could cover that and SCO would escape a death sentence. SCO, or some version of it, is likely to survive for another day.
This is likely bad news for OpenSolaris and Sun. Novell now has Sun over a barrel. Sun was able to open source Solaris because it thought it bought a license from SCO to have free-and-clear rights to the SysV parts in Solaris. According to the decision, in 1994 Novell & Sun agreed for a 20-year non-disclosure on release of UNIX source code. That runs out in 2014. SUN then amended this with SCO to remove the non-disclosure. The last sentence on page 20 of the decisions says, "Absent the removal of the 1994 Sun Agreement's Confidentiality restrictions, Sun would not have been licensed to publically release the OpenSolaris source code". And on page 36k "In the 2003 Sun Agreement, SCO renegotiated a contract and expanded Sun's rights to technology still owned by Novell". Later on the same page "The court thus concludes and declares that SCO was without authority to enter into the 2003 Sun Agreement....".
Novell now has a HUGE stick to beat over Sun's head. OpenSolaris has basically been declared illegal.
If I remember correctly, Novell has declared that they are done suing over UNIX. So Sun might be off the hook. However, if Novell is not so gracious and sues Sun over OpenSolaris. Sun will loose and will seek for SCO to indemnify it. SCO won't have the money. Then SCO will finally die.
Does this mean we might all go to jail when we get that dialog that the program we are running has performed an illegal operation and will be shut down? Is a fatal error the death penalty?
The EEE strategy can be stopped via a licensing scheme. That was the way Sun stopped MS over Java. ODF should do the same, minus the royalties
Create open standard that is copyrighted and trademarked
Create free test suite for open standard
Predicate free-gratis license to distribute on passing test suite
Profit! and compatibility all around
For what it's worth, I think this should be used with html, ecmascript, and css. You should only be ALLOWED to implement those standards if you can agree to follow those standards. The Open Group does with UNIX and the Single Unix Specification, but ofcourse, they charge exorbitant fees.
It is not in their immediate interest to produce this while there is still oil in the ground. Oil in the ground is finite, therefore it is scarce and the scarcity coupled with high demand drives the price.
If any-odd-company could produce it in a vat, then the scarcity and a large part of the value evaporates. Oil wouldn't be worthless overnight (as you mention it would still be used for plastics and petro-chemicals), but a large part of the market would switch meaning oil would be worth much less.
How about layering? Each layer will eventually fail and burn off as it passes through the corona, but it would buy time for the layers beneath. Since you would be traveling at increadible speeds, you would only have to buy a finite amount of time before you reached the lower cooler surface zone. It would be quite bulky, but could be assembled in orbit.
I'm one of those freeloaders. I've never delved into the code in X, but I suspect that X and all its various components and libs are rather complex. Even a skilled and experienced programmer would find that daunting. The learning curve just to figure out how it works and fits togather is probably enourmous and would represent a major investment in time. Even well commented code can be hard to figure out. And all of that is before you even approach the bug-fix itself.
I've heard that x.org has been trying to make things more modular, but perhaps that elephant is still too big for most casual coders to eat, even one bite at a time.
If applets are so hot, then why did javascript come about? Why have SpiderMonkey and js when you could have so much more with the JVM and java? Its because they do different things. The JVM is not integrated into the browser like SpiderMonkey. The applets running under the JVM are still seperate from the browswer. The browser just hosts the applet, but doesn't seem to really interact with it. JVM/Applets seem more seperate than even Flash or Silverlight (although, from a security standpoint that might be a good thing). Also, applets have always acted a bit clunky, slow, and ugly. Ugly and slow is why flash took off and applets largely faded into non-use. Clunky and slow is why JS beats java for client side interaction.
BTW, I've never seen anything run in an applet beside Java.
I would like to see an integration on the level of JavaScript where Parrot (or something like it) is a part of the browser and interpreted along with the markup and can interact with the DOM like JS does. Applets are just too "sandboxed".
MS is acutally doing soomthing pretty cool with Silverlight 2, in the sense that any.Net language can now run in the plugin.
JavaScript is standard now and "good enough" for lots of things, but it would be great to be able to script ANY language to run in the brower. Parrot is sort of similiar to.Net in the sense that many different languages are compiled down to a common intermediate bytecode. Why not replace the javascript engine (spidermonkey/tamarin) with Parrot (or something similiar) that can run a script in ANY language? This is esentially what MS is trying to do with silverlight and its actually a pretty good idea.
Moonlight wouldn't fit this completely because it is still a.Net only thing. But Parrot supports lots of traditionally open source languages.
I think syncing the major distro's would be a boon to Linux overall. It would make support easier for third party vendors and ISVs, which might induce them to release more major Linux applications. For instance, Oracle or Adobe whould know that a particular version of their product would only have to support a certain kernel (altough each distro has patches) and a certain version of Gnome and/or KDE as opposed to ten different point-releases of kernel,KDE, and Gnome. The would know which versions of the Gnu utililities they can expect to support.
Anything that makes it easier to for major software vendors to release and support software makes Linux stronger.
They could reverse the polarity of the neutrino emitter by modulating the frequency harmonics across the sub-space spectrum to acheive FTL comm. At least, that how Geordi La Forge did it.
The Veterans Affairs payroll system "Personnel and Accounting Integrated Data" (PAID) Pay System was first planned in the Kennedy administration (1963) and deployment begain in 1964.
See VA History Highlights for 1963 & 1964
I don't know what type of system it is running on now (probably OpenVMS from HP), during the 70-90's it ran on VAX VMS.
During the earlier part of this decade, they tried upgrading to a system built on Oracle Financials. The develoment project was called CoreFLS, was budgeted at $400+ million and was canceled as a failure after spending $240+ Million. So they are still running PAID, as far as I know.
Because "bio-diesel" sounds niffy, cutting edge, and enviro-friendly. Just the sorta thing that a bay-area tech exec who has money to spend will latch on to. Not to mention that bio-diesel will help them achieve enterprise-level scalability, lower TCO, and higher ROI by leveraging eco-friendly synergies.
You are largely on target with your comments, but a new HTML standard won't fix it because everybody will still be free to do their own thing. Somebody needs to crack the whip and that somebody has to be the W3C.
The Open Group and Posix/Single Unix Specification could be an inspiration on how to approach this (although OpenGroup didn't implement properly with Unix either).
The W3C should do the following:
Trademark "Web Browser", "HTML-5", "CSS-3", and get Sun to donate the "JavaScript" trademark
Provide a free-gratis MIT, BSD, or public domain licensed reference implementation of html/css rendering and javascript engines
Provide a free-gratis browser test suite focusing on standards and consistancy of rendering. Any proprietary extensions automatically will be cause for failure
Browsers that pass the test suite can be licensed to be labled a "Web Browser" and "HTML5/CSS3/Javascript Ready"
Launch public campaign of scorn and shame to get non-complient "unlicensed" browsers shunned.
Properly implemented and administered, that would end fragmentation. Focus should be on consistancy of rendering, not golly-gee-whiz features. What is actually in the standard is less important than that everybody renders it the same.
Not to be confused, presumably, with a nation whose government has a demonstrated history of violating the privacy rights of its own citizens and stating on the record that it doesn't accord any such rights at all to anyone who isn't one of its own citizens, including the vast numbers of Internet users from other nations whose traffic is all but certain to pass through systems under its jurisdiction, and within which it has repeatedly been shown that major communication providers are more than willing to provide the government with access to traffic they carry without proper authorisation anyway.
Of which nation do you speak? Perhaps China? Iran? Russia? France? UK? Germany?. Because all of these nations and probably every other one in the world have the same "demonstrated history" that you speak of, although some more so than others. Which is the point here: some more so than others.
And which nation has independent (i.e. not state owned) operators who can say "no" like Quest? And which nation can actually have a public debate of these matters or can have disputes resolved before a (relatively) impartial court?
Methinks that either your disingenious anti-american myopia has blinded you, or you are incredibly naive about how all nation states behave in regards to perceived threats. Before you complain about the splinter in your brother's eye, you should remove the plank from your own.
Since when do you get to charge someone one amount, deliver the product, and AFTER the fact say, "By the way, we messed up, and you owe us twice as much?" Is this just a case of liberals not being able to stand their ground again? What the hell is wrong with these people that they can't just say that the transaction has taken place, and there's no remedy? I mean, I understand the NY Times going after the money to protect their journalistic credibility, but MoveOn should've thumbed their nose at them, based solely upon the fact that that's not how business works.
MoveOn is a registered federal political action committee. Under the campaign finance laws (which liberals generally support) and Federal Election Commission regulations, it is illegal for corporations to make contributions of any funds to a PAC. Further, under federal regulations, a discount is considered a contribution. So the $77,000 discount constitutes an illegal soft-money contribution.
The Time was compelled to rectify the situation as soon as it was brought to their attention or face the possibility of a federal fine many times the amount in dispute.
Slashdot Mirror
How and why would a 5-year old story about bankruptcy suddenly get "voted up" in at the South Florida Sun-Sentinel so that news aggregators (and google-bot) would pick it up? Sounds very suspicious to me.
So are you telling me that I could set up a "click-bot" to vote up old-news and make myself rich in the ensuing mayhem?
The review says, "They also use the POSIX standard, so that all of the examples are portable across platforms."
So if the book and examples limit themselves to the POSIX subset of bash's capabilities and don't go into the GNU extensions, is the book really about "bash"? It sounds like the book could be called "UNIX shell cookbook" (oops already done) or "Ksh Cookbook" just as much as "Bash Cookbook". But of course, bash is the Linux default and Linux is hot while Unix is passe.
I always thought it was the gnu extensions above and beyond POSIX (while staying backwards capatable with POSIX) that make the gnu tools like bash and gawk so much (allegedly) better than ksh and awk.
BTW, I use bash because it is the default on most linux systems so I am familiar with it. Bash is the very first thing I install on BSD or Solaris systems and then I set it as my login shell. It's actually really rare that I need to call on the gnu extensions, so I could probably be happy with pdksh just as well.
" a hole in the arctic that would prove the earth was hollow"
That's where the north pole of the great axle goes
I don't see why the package manager (rpm/yum or deb/apt or whatever) can't keep track of the base system and utilities being in /bin and /usr/bin and then putting applications like openoffice or xpdf into either opt or /usr/local. Even then, I would still prefer that each app have its own discrete directory like /opt/appName/bin for the programs and opt/appName/etc for the config files instead of the common practice of mixing up different programs into a single bin directory.
/usr/local/bin and the httpd.conf into /usr/local/etc, I put them into /usr/local/apache/bin and /usr/local/apache/conf respectively (which actually the apache default anyway). I think package manager should do the same and put "optional" package into /opt/appName
For example, when I compile Apache, I don't dump the httpd into
All the distrubtions use the same basic set of Gnu tools (like GCC, binutils, bash) and common programs like the perl binary. So why not have all the contemporaneous (i.e. released in the same time-frame) distros use the same tools? Shuttleworth was basically advocating an extended version of this (although he phrased it in terms of a coordinated release cycle) to be policy across several distros and to include higher-level applications like GNOME, KDE, and OO (besides the low level stuff like binutils).
/usr/bin with non-system programs and put user install apps in /usr/local or /opt where they belong. ;)
As I've said before, software vendors like Oracle would love this because it would simplify their support.
Now if only LSB would stop the cluttering of
It sounds like you are accusing the Church of suppressing education and civilization. Are you saying the collaspe of education and civilization had nothing to do with that whole burning and pillaging thing from the pagan barbarian hordes such as the Goths and Vandals? As far as the availability of education, I doubt the tillers of the land in the Late Empire were anymore literate than the tillers of the land in the Dark Ages. What did happen is that trade was choked off and the economy collapsed as a result of a bunch of petty barbarians chieftans destroying the political and economic unity of the Empire. The literate magister of the latin villa (ruling class) was replaced with an illiterate german lord of the manor
The old educated economic classes were destroyed and disposed by the germans. The Church was the only educated class left, but by accident and not by their own design. They were "exclusively" educated because they provided education themselves internally, not because they choked it off to the rest of the world. The church held it togather as best they could. They were certainly not responsible for the advent of Dark Ages as you seem to imply.
So my point here is that "scientific" computer models should be greeted with skepticism, even when they accurately predict. They should be absolutely scorned when they fail to accurately predict. There are a whole bunch of "scientists" out there running computer similations that are far less predictive than this device that is likey based on a geocentric theory of the universe.
SCOsource also open sourced "Ancient Unix". This supposedly unencumbered the orginal classic vi, which is widely used (according to the oracle of true that is wikipedia). Now it might be encumbered again. Time to check the CVS repositories and see which version you are shipping.
Fourtunately, there are lots of libre free alternates (like nvi and vim).
SCO got off easy... this time. But the next shoe to drop will be if Novell sues Sun over OpenSolaris and Sun invokes the indemnity clause in its agreement with SCO. Then SCO will be on the hook.
The current judgment of $2.5M is practically nominal in the big picture. A large investor could cover that and SCO would escape a death sentence. SCO, or some version of it, is likely to survive for another day.
This is likely bad news for OpenSolaris and Sun. Novell now has Sun over a barrel. Sun was able to open source Solaris because it thought it bought a license from SCO to have free-and-clear rights to the SysV parts in Solaris. According to the decision, in 1994 Novell & Sun agreed for a 20-year non-disclosure on release of UNIX source code. That runs out in 2014. SUN then amended this with SCO to remove the non-disclosure. The last sentence on page 20 of the decisions says, "Absent the removal of the 1994 Sun Agreement's Confidentiality restrictions, Sun would not have been licensed to publically release the OpenSolaris source code". And on page 36k "In the 2003 Sun Agreement, SCO renegotiated a contract and expanded Sun's rights to technology still owned by Novell". Later on the same page "The court thus concludes and declares that SCO was without authority to enter into the 2003 Sun Agreement....".
Novell now has a HUGE stick to beat over Sun's head. OpenSolaris has basically been declared illegal.
If I remember correctly, Novell has declared that they are done suing over UNIX. So Sun might be off the hook. However, if Novell is not so gracious and sues Sun over OpenSolaris. Sun will loose and will seek for SCO to indemnify it. SCO won't have the money. Then SCO will finally die.
Does this mean we might all go to jail when we get that dialog that the program we are running has performed an illegal operation and will be shut down? Is a fatal error the death penalty?
- Create open standard that is copyrighted and trademarked
- Create free test suite for open standard
- Predicate free-gratis license to distribute on passing test suite
- Profit! and compatibility all around
For what it's worth, I think this should be used with html, ecmascript, and css. You should only be ALLOWED to implement those standards if you can agree to follow those standards. The Open Group does with UNIX and the Single Unix Specification, but ofcourse, they charge exorbitant fees.It is not in their immediate interest to produce this while there is still oil in the ground. Oil in the ground is finite, therefore it is scarce and the scarcity coupled with high demand drives the price.
If any-odd-company could produce it in a vat, then the scarcity and a large part of the value evaporates. Oil wouldn't be worthless overnight (as you mention it would still be used for plastics and petro-chemicals), but a large part of the market would switch meaning oil would be worth much less.
How about layering? Each layer will eventually fail and burn off as it passes through the corona, but it would buy time for the layers beneath. Since you would be traveling at increadible speeds, you would only have to buy a finite amount of time before you reached the lower cooler surface zone. It would be quite bulky, but could be assembled in orbit.
I'm one of those freeloaders. I've never delved into the code in X, but I suspect that X and all its various components and libs are rather complex. Even a skilled and experienced programmer would find that daunting. The learning curve just to figure out how it works and fits togather is probably enourmous and would represent a major investment in time. Even well commented code can be hard to figure out. And all of that is before you even approach the bug-fix itself.
I've heard that x.org has been trying to make things more modular, but perhaps that elephant is still too big for most casual coders to eat, even one bite at a time.
If applets are so hot, then why did javascript come about? Why have SpiderMonkey and js when you could have so much more with the JVM and java? Its because they do different things. The JVM is not integrated into the browser like SpiderMonkey. The applets running under the JVM are still seperate from the browswer. The browser just hosts the applet, but doesn't seem to really interact with it. JVM/Applets seem more seperate than even Flash or Silverlight (although, from a security standpoint that might be a good thing). Also, applets have always acted a bit clunky, slow, and ugly. Ugly and slow is why flash took off and applets largely faded into non-use. Clunky and slow is why JS beats java for client side interaction.
BTW, I've never seen anything run in an applet beside Java.
I would like to see an integration on the level of JavaScript where Parrot (or something like it) is a part of the browser and interpreted along with the markup and can interact with the DOM like JS does. Applets are just too "sandboxed".
MS is acutally doing soomthing pretty cool with Silverlight 2, in the sense that any .Net language can now run in the plugin.
.Net in the sense that many different languages are compiled down to a common intermediate bytecode. Why not replace the javascript engine (spidermonkey/tamarin) with Parrot (or something similiar) that can run a script in ANY language? This is esentially what MS is trying to do with silverlight and its actually a pretty good idea.
.Net only thing. But Parrot supports lots of traditionally open source languages.
JavaScript is standard now and "good enough" for lots of things, but it would be great to be able to script ANY language to run in the brower. Parrot is sort of similiar to
Moonlight wouldn't fit this completely because it is still a
Because Ewoks are tasty?
I think syncing the major distro's would be a boon to Linux overall. It would make support easier for third party vendors and ISVs, which might induce them to release more major Linux applications. For instance, Oracle or Adobe whould know that a particular version of their product would only have to support a certain kernel (altough each distro has patches) and a certain version of Gnome and/or KDE as opposed to ten different point-releases of kernel,KDE, and Gnome. The would know which versions of the Gnu utililities they can expect to support.
Anything that makes it easier to for major software vendors to release and support software makes Linux stronger.
They could reverse the polarity of the neutrino emitter by modulating the frequency harmonics across the sub-space spectrum to acheive FTL comm. At least, that how Geordi La Forge did it.
The Veterans Affairs payroll system "Personnel and Accounting Integrated Data" (PAID) Pay System was first planned in the Kennedy administration (1963) and deployment begain in 1964. See VA History Highlights for 1963 & 1964
I don't know what type of system it is running on now (probably OpenVMS from HP), during the 70-90's it ran on VAX VMS.
During the earlier part of this decade, they tried upgrading to a system built on Oracle Financials. The develoment project was called CoreFLS, was budgeted at $400+ million and was canceled as a failure after spending $240+ Million. So they are still running PAID, as far as I know.
Because "bio-diesel" sounds niffy, cutting edge, and enviro-friendly. Just the sorta thing that a bay-area tech exec who has money to spend will latch on to. Not to mention that bio-diesel will help them achieve enterprise-level scalability, lower TCO, and higher ROI by leveraging eco-friendly synergies.
In Soviet Russia, ICANN .su YOU. You will .ru the day ICANN .su you.
The Open Group and Posix/Single Unix Specification could be an inspiration on how to approach this (although OpenGroup didn't implement properly with Unix either).
The W3C should do the following:
- Trademark "Web Browser", "HTML-5", "CSS-3", and get Sun to donate the "JavaScript" trademark
- Provide a free-gratis MIT, BSD, or public domain licensed reference implementation of html/css rendering and javascript engines
- Provide a free-gratis browser test suite focusing on standards and consistancy of rendering. Any proprietary extensions automatically will be cause for failure
- Browsers that pass the test suite can be licensed to be labled a "Web Browser" and "HTML5/CSS3/Javascript Ready"
- Launch public campaign of scorn and shame to get non-complient "unlicensed" browsers shunned.
Properly implemented and administered, that would end fragmentation. Focus should be on consistancy of rendering, not golly-gee-whiz features. What is actually in the standard is less important than that everybody renders it the same.Not to be confused, presumably, with a nation whose government has a demonstrated history of violating the privacy rights of its own citizens and stating on the record that it doesn't accord any such rights at all to anyone who isn't one of its own citizens, including the vast numbers of Internet users from other nations whose traffic is all but certain to pass through systems under its jurisdiction, and within which it has repeatedly been shown that major communication providers are more than willing to provide the government with access to traffic they carry without proper authorisation anyway.
Of which nation do you speak? Perhaps China? Iran? Russia? France? UK? Germany?. Because all of these nations and probably every other one in the world have the same "demonstrated history" that you speak of, although some more so than others. Which is the point here: some more so than others.
And which nation has independent (i.e. not state owned) operators who can say "no" like Quest? And which nation can actually have a public debate of these matters or can have disputes resolved before a (relatively) impartial court?
Methinks that either your disingenious anti-american myopia has blinded you, or you are incredibly naive about how all nation states behave in regards to perceived threats. Before you complain about the splinter in your brother's eye, you should remove the plank from your own.
The Time was compelled to rectify the situation as soon as it was brought to their attention or face the possibility of a federal fine many times the amount in dispute.