Can we really extend RSS like this? Shouldn't they rename it to MCS (Microsoft Complex Syndication)? I mean, RSS stands for Really Simple Syndication...
the public at large would not seem to agree and is not actually demanding any such stripped down version. Perhaps the EU's actions were unnecessary?
Completely stupid. Since when do people know what they really need/want? And where do you see a direct link between what Dell offer and what the public wants? Oh yeah, I remember : big corporations read into ours minds, make an average of our divergent needs and generate the perfect product to satisfy our fundamental needs. Where was my mind? Shredded in this big mind sucker?;)
Like you, I find it handy to use a software to keep every password. One big hard password to rule them all.;)
Since Keepass is windows only, I suggest Linux readers Gringotts or this article for other ideas. Also have a look at FSF's suggestions for encryption here.
Has I understand it, GPL about sharing the code and make sure everybody can modify it to it's own need. So why ask whom it is to? As long as you share your modifications, I don't see why ask this question!?
The only think I could think of is when you want to buy GPL software : their is many contributors. Can you do it without everyone's assent. But the right thing to do is to fork with dual licenses.
Deer Park Alpha 1 is an alpha release of our next generation Firefox browser and it is being made available for testing purposes only. Deer Park Alpha 1 is intended for web application developers and our testing community. Current users of Mozilla Firefox 1.0.x should not use Deer Park Alpha 1.
Watch out before trying this. Deer Park IS NOT Firefox and may break your current Firefox setup. Make sure to backup your profiles.
Forget about it. This would mean to learn from mistakes... something I rarely seen. Especially when they (software companies, read MS) are not forced to do so. Microsoft never worried about security since DOS and why should they? People buy their crap.
Security is a lot bigger than software. Think of social engineering, communication listening, paid employees, etc. This story reminds me another (in french). NDS (own by Rupert Murdoch) bought a 5M$ microscope to decypher Canal+ (French company) encryption chip and published how to hack there satellite program. Intersting read...
Seems like Israel is on the edge of technology and ready to play the american way of buziness.
No, I'm not confusing URI with URL. The problem is that the world at large uses them interchangably. URI is abused all over the place. That's human nature. Telling the world "you're mis-understand how to URI" doesn't solve the problem that Semantic Web defines URI as authorative source. Talk about building a house on a beach with a hurricane coming.
This is normal that people uses them interchangably, current web uses exclusively URL, so URI is like a new concept for most. As a matter of fact, they could not confuse them becaue they were not aware of URI.
Even though people were confused, there is nothing to worry about. The worst that can happen is that two people refering to the same thing use to different URI (in any event, it is something that is already assumed in open worlds). So, I really don't see the problem here.
my explanation was poor. according to the RDF spec, rdf consists of two parts: model and graph. The model represents an object, like car, cat, boat, house, etc. The graph represents the relationship between the objects, like honda->car->vehicle. The graph is suppose to allow the system to "infer" facts which are not explicitly stated. In other words, a RDF engine would be able to infer a Honda is a type of vehicle.
I see what you mean. None the less, reasonning over hierarchies uses RDFS since hierarchy isn't trully possible in plain RDF.
If you look at what the spec describes in terms of building the Graph, it is very similar to dependency grammar techniques. After all, both attempt to interpret data.
Sure, there are similarities between dependency grammar techniques and RDF. But, RDF does not interpret, it describes. RDF could be used to represent such dependencies. Over RDF you can put RDFS and/or OWL to infer.
I read the spec plenty of times, but it is still a horrible specification. RDF engines (reasoners as RDF people like to call it) are attempting to do the same thing AI researchers have been working on for 3 decades. The only differnce is the W3C RDF people have a huge chip on their shoulders and refuse to see reality is dirty and messy. Trying to infer anything from dirty data is an unbounded problem. there's no getting around that.
IMHO, semantic web is not about bringing old IA concepts, it is more about building a framework for representing knowlegde (which is a field of IA). When this is done, you can do what you want ; plug IA or everthing else.
I think we agree that we are really not there and only future will tell.
We should be working on being able to use even more unstructured data on the web.
I don't see how it can be more unstructured that it already is! You want to get rid of HTML? You can! Maybe we could forget about protocols and standards? We should all have our own language, now that would be unstructured!
I really don't know what you mean by this nor how can it be good.
P.S.: Everyone as to "confirm you're not a script" even logged users.
You live in the past.;)
You are refering URL but semantic web stands on URIs which are a superset URL. If you limit yourself to URL we better not talk semantic web because it transcend the current view of resources. This concept is very significant.
Just to be a little clearer, let's take a simple example. You want to refer to yourself. How can you do this? You can't download yourself on the net (can't you?;). What you can have is an homepage : your page. None the less, it isn't you. That's the limit of URL ; it must describe a resource physically (should I say virtually) on the web. URIs don't have this restriction so you can refer to yourself as http://my.home.page/me/... or anything else for that matter as long as you always refer to this exact same URI and that it is unique in your view of the world.
I don't think the evidence on RDF mailing list supports that opinion. Look at the literature in the bookstores about semantic web. If anything, it is full of confusion and the specification is poorly written compared to the HTML and XML specification.
I don't know which mailing list you refer to, nor which books but the web is an excellent source of information for that matter. Take a look at links returned by google for RDF : here, RDF homepage full spec, RDF primer for some graphs and there or this excellent online book, not to mention tutorials, etc. And BTW there is many good books to buy.
Triplet does not equal (Subject verb object). What the RDF spec describes is closer to Natural Language parsing concepts. There are many similarities between what the RDF describes as RDF Model graph and dependency grammar techniques http://w3.msi.vxu.se/~nivre/research/sdg.html.
I said think of it as a triplet : Subject Verb Objet. That is a little inaccurate, let me correct this to Subject Predicat Object. Now, RDF is little more than that : a Resourse Description Framework (I'm not talking RDFS). Maybe my popularization confused you to think RDF as something to do with NLP but that is completely false.
The fact is RDF is really just triplet. Not surprising that it can be represented in N3 (where 3 stands for triplet). Take a look at this example taken from wikipedia :
Okay, you want more than words... I guess you ask to much.;)
Semantic web is not something you can thing of as a concrete application nor we can consider it mature. As you surely read, semantic web is an extention of the current web. So I can link you to firefox or some HTML editor. Joke aside, it is more complicated than that and if you want to embrass semantic web you should get to know XML, RDF and OWL (in this order). In fact, if you are not working to build sw, you should consider another approach. I suggest you to look at RSSthere and foaf which are IMHO concrete, but limited, examples of semantic web working examples.
As a web developper... try to generate web pages from RDF (mindswap as some tools) or XML (ala gentoo) source.
I agree with you, semantic web is not a reality outside certain circles. But, my point is that it wont come like many think it will : in a big google like demo. It will come from many little implemantations like we see with foaf. We can imagine a big mainstream ISP provider encouraging users in such community.
As for RSS, it is limited, but it took off rapidly. RSS v1.0 introduced RDF. That is another step in the right direction.
BTW RDF isn't that complicated. Think of it as a triplet : Subject Verb Objet.
Slashdot Mirror
Where are those lawyers when we need them!? ;)
And, don't ask me why a main page title mentions Shoreline firewall. :)
Can we really extend RSS like this? Shouldn't they rename it to MCS (Microsoft Complex Syndication)? I mean, RSS stands for Really Simple Syndication...
Even if firefox is vulnerable, get this excellent extension and solve your problem. Happy browsing!
Why is this modded Troll? Because opera is not OSS?
ah moderators...
Here is my reference.
Since Keepass is windows only, I suggest Linux readers Gringotts or this article for other ideas. Also have a look at FSF's suggestions for encryption here.
The only think I could think of is when you want to buy GPL software : their is many contributors. Can you do it without everyone's assent. But the right thing to do is to fork with dual licenses.
So MySQL is becomming SQL... oh wait.
...but it's false ;)
Moderators keep your mod points for something better.
Security is a lot bigger than software. Think of social engineering, communication listening, paid employees, etc. This story reminds me another (in french). NDS (own by Rupert Murdoch) bought a 5M$ microscope to decypher Canal+ (French company) encryption chip and published how to hack there satellite program. Intersting read...
Seems like Israel is on the edge of technology and ready to play the american way of buziness.
Even though people were confused, there is nothing to worry about. The worst that can happen is that two people refering to the same thing use to different URI (in any event, it is something that is already assumed in open worlds). So, I really don't see the problem here.
I think we agree that we are really not there and only future will tell.
I really don't know what you mean by this nor how can it be good.
P.S.: Everyone as to "confirm you're not a script" even logged users.
You are refering URL but semantic web stands on URIs which are a superset URL. If you limit yourself to URL we better not talk semantic web because it transcend the current view of resources. This concept is very significant.
Just to be a little clearer, let's take a simple example. You want to refer to yourself. How can you do this? You can't download yourself on the net (can't you? ;). What you can have is an homepage : your page. None the less, it isn't you. That's the limit of URL ; it must describe a resource physically (should I say virtually) on the web. URIs don't have this restriction so you can refer to yourself as http://my.home.page/me/ ... or anything else for that matter as long as you always refer to this exact same URI and that it is unique in your view of the world.
See the perspective brought by the semantic web?
The fact is RDF is really just triplet. Not surprising that it can be represented in N3 (where 3 stands for triplet). Take a look at this example taken from wikipedia :
which can also be represented in XML/RDF like this(the output isn't pretty, see wikipedia link)So take another look at RDF, you'll be surprised.
Semantic web is not something you can thing of as a concrete application nor we can consider it mature. As you surely read, semantic web is an extention of the current web. So I can link you to firefox or some HTML editor. Joke aside, it is more complicated than that and if you want to embrass semantic web you should get to know XML, RDF and OWL (in this order). In fact, if you are not working to build sw, you should consider another approach. I suggest you to look at RSS there and foaf which are IMHO concrete, but limited, examples of semantic web working examples.
As a web developper... try to generate web pages from RDF (mindswap as some tools) or XML (ala gentoo) source.
As for RSS, it is limited, but it took off rapidly. RSS v1.0 introduced RDF. That is another step in the right direction.
BTW RDF isn't that complicated. Think of it as a triplet : Subject Verb Objet.
So semantic web is coming, little step at a time.