My thoughts exactly. I do wonder how they plan on making money off this.
I always wonder how they plan to make money of anything (search, gmail, maps, earth, sponsoring open source), yet they always manage to do it. It'll be the same here.
No offense, but there's only one product in that list that actually turns a profit. If those were all separate businesses, all but one would be bankrupt.
The one thing that Google does right is not having everything they do as seperate businesses. Almost everything that happens on the Web (arguably on the Net even) makes Google money through ads. They can afford to launch new stuff and give it away for free, exactly because somewhere down the line, it will eventually generate advertising revenue. Wave is the same thing. Wave servers may be completely independent from Google, but you know that Google will have the first and the biggest server, and they will be able to make money out of that.
Google has a unique business model, and it's probably the only company in the world that can afford to work like that.
Strongly disagree. Wave is not 'another integrated communication method'. It is simply email successor. Everyone using email is going to be a wave user. At least in the simple way of 'email++'.
I agree. I never thought I'd say this, but it might be time for a successor to email. I'm getting increasingly frustrated by the limitations of email, and even more so by people using email in the wrong way. Co-workers top-posting their reply above a long and irrelevant discussion, for example. Email is being used for things it wasn't originally intended for. Wave looks like a much better fit.
I've always been extremely conservative in accepting new killer technologies. I've seen the arrival of web forums, instant messaging, blogs, social networking sites, twitter, and I never really considered it might amount to much. I never thought web forums made a good replacement for usenet (yet usenet is practically dead now), I didn't see the attraction of IM, blogs, social networking. I've only had a mobile phone for a couple of years now. (But I do have an iPhone. Because it can do everything.) This is the first time I see a new communication technology arrive and I feel it could really replace some very well established technologies. Email, IM and small-corporate wikis look like the primary victims. If the old technologies survive, it will be because they are easy to integrate into Wave.
(Wait, did I just point out how bad my track record is for these kind of predictions?)
So I'm sure I'll be asked to use google wave before long -- a waste of my employers time.
I think I'll be asking my employer to use it. It looks very useful for discussing complex issues quickly and ending up with a clear document that everybody agrees on (rather than one person's interpretation of what was discussed, and then having to do it all over again).
There is a history bar. Presumably there will be a history tab/page. What exactly do you want from Wave? Something that allow the entire playerbase of WoW to interact in a single document or something to allow collaberation between 1-20 people working on a FOSS project, or in a business?
This is the only valid point he has, and I think it's a valid one. I think it'd be good if you could set certain messages uneditable, or maybe decide that some people can't edit your messages.
Editing a single document together in the middle of a big discussion about the hows and whys can definitely be a very powerful tool, but I think there might be situations where you'd want to keep this in check a bit. But most likely Google is already way ahead of me.
Check the video on youtube of the Google Wave demo at Google IO conference, they show several reference implementations including one that is CLI.
Is that the same demo as the one at wave.google.com? Because that one had one reference implementation, another server that used a copy of that with cosmetic changes, and one complete re-implementation as an ascii interface. I don't think that last one was a reference implementation (although I'm not sure), and while it was plain ascii, it didn't look like a cli either. Not everything ascii is cli, you know.
Anyway, the existence of various implementations, and the fact that you can operate your own wave server completely independent from Google's wave server, is I think the blow that makes a real killer app. It's just as decentralised as email and usenet are. You don't have to put everything on google's server. If Google ever goes down (yeah right), then other servers can just continue independent from them. It's completely unlike Facebook, Skype and many other modern not-quite killer apps, and very much like email, usenet, web and classics like that.
2) I can go back 15 generations in my family tree because the Nazi's had a habit of being thorough and making sure people were in now way "jewish", even if they were christian for 10 generations, they had to be christian for at least 15. I have a hard time believing they would hire anyone jewish as a soldier or a member of the police.
But DRM is not the only source of demand for piracy. There's also the desire for free stuff, which is what I refer to when I talk about sales "lost to piracy".
True, but I'm not sure if those are really lost sales. Chances are people who want free stuff aren't planning to pay anyway.
Basically, if you pirate, we can't tell if you are a crusader or just a cheapskate.
Not always. Some people buy and then get the cracked version. They don't want the hurt, but do want to support the developers. Or at least the feeling they're not stealing.
Perhaps, but not all as obviously as scientology. Hubbard didn't start out by saying: "God has revealed himself to me", he started out by saying: "If you want to get really rich, you've got to start your own religion." And then he started a religion. He announced that it was fake, and people still believe it.
Hassan distinguishes between what he terms as destructive cults and benign cults. A destructive cult, according to Hassan, has a "pyramid-shaped authoritarian regime with a person or group of people that have dictatorial control." and "uses deception in recruiting new members." In contrast, benign cults are, according to Hassan, "any group of people who have a set of beliefs and rituals that are non-mainstream."
So benign cults are not a bad thing at all then?
Freedom of religion? No, I don't think that's a bad thing at all.
And "destructive" cult definition pretty much exactly matches Catholic church?
Depends a bit on how you look at it. In practice, the pope doesn't really have dictatorial control, and many catholics completely ignore him and much of his hierarchy, but in theory, the pope can dictate official doctrine, decide what's true and what isn't, and other silly things like that. The Catholic church in the middle ages would definitely count as destructive cult. Nowadays, many catholics don't take their church leaders seriously enough for that. But look at the chruch's influence in some countries, and how they use that influence (condom usage in Africa, to name a famous example), and it's clear they can be quite destructive.
This is the strange world of software and movies: when you're honest, you're hassled. If you pirate, your life suddenly becomes a lot easier.
That's exactly the problem with DRM. It only hurts paying customers. If you don't want to get hurt, you need to get the cracked version. They're driving honest customers away.
It means the validity of your code actually means something.
The simple fact of the matter is that there is no practical difference between HTML and XHTML. Geeky types just "think it looks cleaner." Being able to validate as XML gives you absolutely *nothing*, it just makes it that much harder for the average person to write a web page.
How about the millions of xml editing tools? That makes it a lot harder to write broken xhtml.
There has never been a truly non violent religion historically, and I am certain that you are ignorant of much of christian history, and the evolution of christianity itself.
Then you are wrong and jumping to unfounded conclusions.
I'm only asking if you think that not killing people is as bad as killing people, since that's basically what you seemed to be claiming.
Slashdot Mirror
Why does slashdot allow people to submit stories about their own blog posts?
So we can ridicule them.
Unless Google comes out with messaging standards, I don't see this ability existing in Wave clients
Why not? And isn't "coming out with messaging standards" exactly what they're doing here?
My thoughts exactly. I do wonder how they plan on making money off this.
I always wonder how they plan to make money of anything (search, gmail, maps, earth, sponsoring open source), yet they always manage to do it. It'll be the same here.
No offense, but there's only one product in that list that actually turns a profit. If those were all separate businesses, all but one would be bankrupt.
The one thing that Google does right is not having everything they do as seperate businesses. Almost everything that happens on the Web (arguably on the Net even) makes Google money through ads. They can afford to launch new stuff and give it away for free, exactly because somewhere down the line, it will eventually generate advertising revenue. Wave is the same thing. Wave servers may be completely independent from Google, but you know that Google will have the first and the biggest server, and they will be able to make money out of that.
Google has a unique business model, and it's probably the only company in the world that can afford to work like that.
Strongly disagree. Wave is not 'another integrated communication method'. It is simply email successor. Everyone using email is going to be a wave user. At least in the simple way of 'email++'.
I agree. I never thought I'd say this, but it might be time for a successor to email. I'm getting increasingly frustrated by the limitations of email, and even more so by people using email in the wrong way. Co-workers top-posting their reply above a long and irrelevant discussion, for example. Email is being used for things it wasn't originally intended for. Wave looks like a much better fit.
I've always been extremely conservative in accepting new killer technologies. I've seen the arrival of web forums, instant messaging, blogs, social networking sites, twitter, and I never really considered it might amount to much. I never thought web forums made a good replacement for usenet (yet usenet is practically dead now), I didn't see the attraction of IM, blogs, social networking. I've only had a mobile phone for a couple of years now. (But I do have an iPhone. Because it can do everything.) This is the first time I see a new communication technology arrive and I feel it could really replace some very well established technologies. Email, IM and small-corporate wikis look like the primary victims. If the old technologies survive, it will be because they are easy to integrate into Wave.
(Wait, did I just point out how bad my track record is for these kind of predictions?)
So I'm sure I'll be asked to use google wave before long -- a waste of my employers time.
I think I'll be asking my employer to use it. It looks very useful for discussing complex issues quickly and ending up with a clear document that everybody agrees on (rather than one person's interpretation of what was discussed, and then having to do it all over again).
* Editing Ability Could Get Out of Control
There is a history bar. Presumably there will be a history tab/page. What exactly do you want from Wave? Something that allow the entire playerbase of WoW to interact in a single document or something to allow collaberation between 1-20 people working on a FOSS project, or in a business?
This is the only valid point he has, and I think it's a valid one. I think it'd be good if you could set certain messages uneditable, or maybe decide that some people can't edit your messages.
Editing a single document together in the middle of a big discussion about the hows and whys can definitely be a very powerful tool, but I think there might be situations where you'd want to keep this in check a bit. But most likely Google is already way ahead of me.
Check the video on youtube of the Google Wave demo at Google IO conference, they show several reference implementations including one that is CLI.
Is that the same demo as the one at wave.google.com? Because that one had one reference implementation, another server that used a copy of that with cosmetic changes, and one complete re-implementation as an ascii interface. I don't think that last one was a reference implementation (although I'm not sure), and while it was plain ascii, it didn't look like a cli either. Not everything ascii is cli, you know.
Anyway, the existence of various implementations, and the fact that you can operate your own wave server completely independent from Google's wave server, is I think the blow that makes a real killer app. It's just as decentralised as email and usenet are. You don't have to put everything on google's server. If Google ever goes down (yeah right), then other servers can just continue independent from them. It's completely unlike Facebook, Skype and many other modern not-quite killer apps, and very much like email, usenet, web and classics like that.
2) I can go back 15 generations in my family tree because the Nazi's had a habit of being thorough and making sure people were in now way "jewish", even if they were christian for 10 generations, they had to be christian for at least 15. I have a hard time believing they would hire anyone jewish as a soldier or a member of the police.
Didn't Hitler have a Jewish grandparent?
Reminds me of this Lego stop-motion animation film.
But DRM is not the only source of demand for piracy. There's also the desire for free stuff, which is what I refer to when I talk about sales "lost to piracy".
True, but I'm not sure if those are really lost sales. Chances are people who want free stuff aren't planning to pay anyway.
Basically, if you pirate, we can't tell if you are a crusader or just a cheapskate.
Mostly you can't tell who's a pirate anyway.
Even if you don't buy it, there's no telling whether the sale is lost to piracy or DRM.
Is there really a difference? DRM creates a demand for piracy.
Either way, it's a lost sale due to DRM.
Not always. Some people buy and then get the cracked version. They don't want the hurt, but do want to support the developers. Or at least the feeling they're not stealing.
Scientology is to science fiction what Al Quaeda is to Islam. An excessively violent and abusive organisation very loosely based on those writings.
They're all made up.
Perhaps, but not all as obviously as scientology. Hubbard didn't start out by saying: "God has revealed himself to me", he started out by saying: "If you want to get really rich, you've got to start your own religion." And then he started a religion. He announced that it was fake, and people still believe it.
Hassan distinguishes between what he terms as destructive cults and benign cults. A destructive cult, according to Hassan, has a "pyramid-shaped authoritarian regime with a person or group of people that have dictatorial control." and "uses deception in recruiting new members." In contrast, benign cults are, according to Hassan, "any group of people who have a set of beliefs and rituals that are non-mainstream."
So benign cults are not a bad thing at all then?
Freedom of religion? No, I don't think that's a bad thing at all.
And "destructive" cult definition pretty much exactly matches Catholic church?
Depends a bit on how you look at it. In practice, the pope doesn't really have dictatorial control, and many catholics completely ignore him and much of his hierarchy, but in theory, the pope can dictate official doctrine, decide what's true and what isn't, and other silly things like that. The Catholic church in the middle ages would definitely count as destructive cult. Nowadays, many catholics don't take their church leaders seriously enough for that. But look at the chruch's influence in some countries, and how they use that influence (condom usage in Africa, to name a famous example), and it's clear they can be quite destructive.
This is the strange world of software and movies: when you're honest, you're hassled. If you pirate, your life suddenly becomes a lot easier.
That's exactly the problem with DRM. It only hurts paying customers. If you don't want to get hurt, you need to get the cracked version. They're driving honest customers away.
This thread is about religion. Keep your science out of it.
GVIM is not an IDE however. It's an editor, and one that can be integrated in various IDEs.
I've even used GVIM in Visual Studio.
The fact that you have a 6000 sq ft house in SoCal suggests that your idea of expensive is probably a lot higher than mine.
Yeah. My entire electrical bill is about $100 per month.
Anyway, all the burglars I have heard of do not use lock-picking but rather brute force...
Exactly. Skill is nice, but often unnecessary.
It's mostly hackers that care about picking mechanical locks without causing damage.
I love the idea of home automation, then I realize that my light switch isn't that far away.
A girl I know has a web interface to open her front door.
In *practical* terms, what does that give me?
It means the validity of your code actually means something.
The simple fact of the matter is that there is no practical difference between HTML and XHTML. Geeky types just "think it looks cleaner." Being able to validate as XML gives you absolutely *nothing*, it just makes it that much harder for the average person to write a web page.
How about the millions of xml editing tools? That makes it a lot harder to write broken xhtml.
There has never been a truly non violent religion historically, and I am certain that you are ignorant of much of christian history, and the evolution of christianity itself.
Then you are wrong and jumping to unfounded conclusions.
I'm only asking if you think that not killing people is as bad as killing people, since that's basically what you seemed to be claiming.