Well here's an example of a nice SQL thing that I got in the email from a sysadmin friend of mine. Feel free to mod this as "Funny" -- it doesn't fit anything else...
I feel sorry for this dude.
... doesn't it end up being easier reading the documentation for the SQL products themselves? SQL is one of the few languages I would argue actually does *not* need a book. Reading a PHP/Perl book about any RDBMS using SQL would enlighten one as to the basic functionality; all further research could be done on the site of the RDBMS of choice. Yes, this would imply that they end up learning implementation specific SQL, but as long as one sticks to the "basic guidelines" found in the aforementioned books, one should be able to write fairly portable SQL, and fairly quickly.
No, really, it's not funny, it's a good idea. It'd be a nice research project to put up a "Google honeypot" of sorts with fake directory indices, "hacker tricks" (as are here so deemed) and the like. Get a few people to link to it and see what kind of activity is found. I think this would also accurately poll the cracker levels at Google, assuming you had "keyword rich honey" (for lack of a better description).
Perhaps I'll do this.
Google has a nice long list of directory lists containing warez (remember the days of l33t FTP searching for filenames? Google for something like, in my last article: "xwin32*.exe * * * * *" "listing of"), serial numbers (Oh, I've found XP's serial number several times in Google's cache) and other "sensitive" information. My question is if other commercial sites are being constantly shut down due to these links (intentional or not), why aren't people targeting Google as well?
In fact, if I'm *cough*too cheap to buy software*cough* or just want to evaluate some crippleware or such before I buy it, I often skip astalavista and cracks.am and just Google it up. Saves me the porn and pop ups, and I don't have to cripple my browser for this (yes I know it's possible to do in other ways, yes I enjoy javascript, no thanks, I don't want comments about how I'm retarded because I don't do it the right way).
Because of the academic merit of both of these search mechanisms, I doubt either one will be shut down. Indeed, I highly doubt restrictions will be placed. They're valuable tools for finding more valuable tools. For more information about this sort of stuff, I suggest searching on Fravia+'s web-searching lore. Other information on there relates to "reality cracking", reverse engineering, and other taboo topics. Google's got it all cached. Interested? Just search for (insert topic here) site:searchlores.org.
Sometimes I don't think the comparison of Google to God is that far off. Pardon my heresy.
Thanks for the compliment. I do believe that the actor portraying Peter R. de Vries used it in the "correct" manner as you've described. As an American who's been in Holland for a little over 1.5 years, I must say that my Dutch grammar isn't completely perfect yet:). Of course, this ehhhh (English fails me at the moment) uitzending of the program was probably 8 or 9 months ago (last season), so it isn't exactly fresh.
Bedankt:)
One should not have to formally request the source. The source distribution must be easily obtainable. I doubt that dealing with the hassles of a merged (read: taken over) company's customer service (who probably know nothing of the case) will pass as "easy going". Of course, IANAL:(.
Additionally docs.sun.com has all the information you could possibly want about ANYTHING Sun (even REALLY old stuff).
I think this book has somewhat poor timing. Solaris 10 is already being released for piloting. And if I weren't writing for Wiley (*not* a Dummies book) I would say that I hated the Dummies name as well;).
I'm sure that everybody's familiar with the output and quality of different various translators available online. I myself have been very interested in creating such a utility, and then one based on statistical language analysis. In my time in Holland, I've enjoyed learning the Dutch language, and have found online utilities to be of little help when translating documents (though I do not require this much anymore, it would have been helpful in the beginning).
Although these methods work better than literal word-for-word translation, they're still not going to be perfect without some sort of human intervention. Dutch, for instance, has a completely different sentence structure than does English. For instance, the sentence "The cow is going to jump over the moon." becomes "De koe gaat over de maan springen" or, literally, "The cow goes over the moon to jump".
Don't laugh at this structure or perhaps any unobvious usefulness. I've had discussions with people regarding the grammatical structure of a language and the society around it. Indeed, a specific example I have comes from a TV show "Kop Spijkers", which is a show focused mainly poking fun at political activity and news events. At times, they have people dressed as popular media and political figures and have comical debates.
In one show, a person acting as Peter R. de Vries (roughly the Dutch equivalent of William Shatner on America's Most Wanted) stated the following joke (JS stands for Jack Spijkerman, the host of the program):
PRdV:...Maar ja, ik ben de niet roker van het jaar.
JS: Hoezo?
PRdV: Nou, ik rook 2 pakjes per dag... niet.
Translated into English, we would not find the humor in this transaction:
PRdV:...Anyway, I'm the non smoker of the year.
JS: How do you figure that?
PRdV: Well, I... don't... smoke 2 packs per day.
Sure you can crack a smile about it, but it's much funnier when the punchline comes at a climax. And in English, it is not possible to state "Well, I smoke 2 packs per day... NOT" (without sounding like a retard who's watched too much Wayne's World).
Getting back on topic, I believe there will be major issues with any tranlsation algorithm to come. This is, of course, to be expected; I hope, however, that more advances will soon follow.
Well, you know you can make dynamic libraries and NOT compile them into the core language. Then you drop a.so file into the correct directory. And when you want to use it, you type dl('some_extension.so').
Java has many different DBI possibilities, at least as many as PHP has.
Yes you do have more problems with "portability" but that's expected, I guess. However, I don't know any widely used extensions that don't have binaries available for win32, linux, and bsd. Many even are packaged for Solaris on SPARC.
I won't comment on Java's performance, but you really do need a lot of nice hardware to run Java things well. It has lots of overhead.
So, when can I sign up for the email equivalent of this list? Granted I get enough Taiwanese junk, but that's the easiest to block. I'd love to be able to serve the people with the broken "Unsubscribe" URLs in their emails with a nice fine.
...Flash is not a closed format. The SWF file format is open, and if you have a good reason (i.e. one to boost their interests), macromedia will send you the source code to the player.
Of course you're going to have this. These companies spend millions of dollars making sure their pages are coming to the top of EVERY search engine, including Google. If somebody is searching for information about apples, they will search for "apples" not "apple". And if you search for "apples" you get a page entitled "Apples & More" with the description "Learn all about apples, growing and using them...".
The same can be said for the stupid comparison to flowers. Of the idiots who search for "flowers" for information about a research paper (those who know nothing about flowers), they will soon see that "information about flowers" "flower biology" and "flower development" turn up more relevent and less commercial terms.
Of course, if I searched for "design" I'd get a trillion pages about web design. But what if I was searching for "interior design". That's completely different.
It'd be sad if people were this stupid. But the reality is that people know what they're looking for and how to find it. I give this article a -1 STUPID.
To clarify this, I'm "using" Linux in a sense that I'm developing it and distributing it for money. Only the SMP 2.4 version. I'm not an end-user in this circumstance. I am sure I can goof with the SMP stuff in 2.2 to handle more CPUs, but it will definitely not be as robust.
This is not an end to anything. The worst that can happen is IBM loses 3 billion dollars, people who distribute 2.4 kernels for profit can be charged and Linux must re-write a few parts of code. It's not the end of an OS.
Although I don't see how this is a violation of the GPL as many of you are suggesting. If the stuff is copyrighted by SCO, SCO hasn't expressly (i.e. on paper with a signature) allowed use of their code in Linux and the Linux code is using SCO's code, then that code is under SCO's license. The illegality here would then be that the code has been stolen and relicensed under a license that SCO isn't favoring. In other words: if it's SCO's code, and SCO says so, it's got no right in Linux.
SCO does have copyrights to the code. If they use them, don't whine. If you used my code in your stuff, and I didn't write you express permission with a signature, I'd sue you too.
For what it's worth, this is not a large project for any large company. But I'd rather play it safe now. Getting one of those stupid SCO letters isn't on my agenda, considering that I'd have to go to court and I don't, at the time, live in America.
I imagine other people who are providing commercial Linux solutions are holding back a little bit until this gets resolved. I can imagine that a company whining so much at this point will only whine ore if they do win the case and find people who didn't stop before they did. Their receiving ownership the copyrights on that code doesn't help much either, since my project makes use of SMP and JFS.
Until things are cleared up, I think I'd rather be safe than sorry.
On alt.os.development, we've been discussing this somewhat humorously. It will eventually not be a problem. Linux will be able to simply rewrite its SMP handling (and other things that have allegedly been taken from SCO). In fact, at the OS level, working with 32 processors is no different from working with 2 (which Linux could already do before the alleged copyright infringement). However, handling 32 processors very well is a completely different story.
In any case, this is a big inconvenience for many people using Linux in their companies. I have to stop development on one of my projects because I don't want to pay SCO any money to use Linux. And why should I? Linux is supposed to be free. (All the more reason to use BSD, which I like more than Linux, but anyway...)
SCO is screaming to be bought out by IBM, even though they say in a press release that this is highly unlikely. It seems obvious to me, in any case -- SCO's not had a very successful product in a very long time.
Here's hoping that the case goes to a court where there are people who know what they're talking about are presiding on the jury.
And somebody please fill me in, but is the SCO hotshot lawyer who lost the Gore case against Florida and worked against Microsoft such a hotshot? It seems to me that he's more of a loser.
My 2 cents.
so you read the article, did you read the license?
on
LGPL is Viral for Java
·
· Score: 1
Because in places where the LGPL is used, there's a clear marker of the specific version of the LGPL. Shortly after that, there is text stating that one may use this version, or to their discresion any other later version of the license when interpreting the licensing agreement. In which case, we come to 2 conclusions:
FSF will say, "Oh, that's not what we meant for the LGPL to do, lets go fix this and make a new version, that way all (unmoified) LGPLed code will be freed!"
FSF will say, "Oh, that's what we meant to do with the license. Don't whine about it."
In any of these cases, there's nothing wrong. Either it's supposed to have this behavior. Or not.
In a couple of years time, BushCo will be gone. Everybody regrets voting for that wanker (everyone I've talked to, anyway). I mean, I don't think anybody with such a resume would really get re-elected. But then again, you never know.
In any case, it'd be super difficult to do any black ops involving the president at a time when presidential change is just coming closer. Sure bills can get pushed through congress super fast, but things like this one will take time, and there's no guarantee that Bush will still be there when this bill or other ones like it finally make it through.
On the other hand, our government does really weird things...
Well I guess that's the way it sounds, but I was hoping they'd answer in a somewhat esoteric manner; I guess my questions really have to do more with understanding why they've come to the conclusions they have about the laws that are in place than asking what the laws are in the first place.
And the Palladium question is an IP question -- simply asking what their opinion is on it.
And if they can't answer the questions, oh well. I had my fun:).
Is there any sense as to the actual guidance of the cryptography export laws? As an American citizen living in the Netherlands, I've been faced with a lot of problems, especially in this area. For instance, I'm legally unable to get source code for projects such as Kerberos (although it's been possible "through other people." I don't get the feeling people take this very seriously, and was wondering what you guys thought.
How do you wish to punish cyber criminals coming from other countries? For instance, if a Dutch hacker cracks a US corporate server (ignoring US/Dutch relations for a bit), would it be possible to prosecute this person? Are there UN regulations for computer "terrorism" (as I'm sure Bush would have it called, ehehe:)
What are your perspective's of Microsoft's Palladium technology and it's legalitites?
How often do internet security cases get tried?
I'm sure I could go on with tons more, but I think this is probably enough.
I get the feeling that they're suggesting with their page that they're doing a trial of their algorithm, not providing some kind of web browser that will be released for popular use. The ideas I get from a license requesting feedback and from the page (after the 5 minute load time) don't necessarily point me in that direction of thinking. However, I see three paths for this tool to follow:
They're testing their algorithm and will be tweaking *this* when they've got adequate feedback. The algorithm will be patented (if it's not already) and sold -- think of all the uses for advertising companies, search engines, etc.
They can sell this tool to advertising agencies as a way to target content on super-dynamic sites (for instance, message boards where the subject line isn't inherently obvious, or discussion sites such as/.)
They're trying to make a browser that will fail
I don't have their page open anymore, and I won't wait for it to load again, but I remember reading a sentence to the effect of "This web browser is testing our new PARC technology." I honestly don't think they're stupid enough to be trying to market a web browser with this.
I've not downloaded this product, but considering that people have mentioned that it requires a JVM... I'm not sure this is such a smart move, considering that Java can be decompiled super-easily. Unless, of course, they've already got that patent...
Anyway, it'll be interesting to see what they end up doing with this.
I'm an American citizen living abroad, heh. I don't care what type of system I'll need to be using. I'm sure they'll get it straight if I press the button 10 times;). And I really don't care if anybody knows who I vote for, or why.
One thing I *do* want to know is whether or not I come from one of the qualified counties, since I'll probably still be here in November, 2004. I'd better get more info:-\
Just FYI, this behavior is due to the fact that Googlebot has a sort of "built-in" mechanism to ignore (or at least rank lower) forum-type sites. Since/. is primarily a "news headline and discussion" site, Google will not rank it as highly as one that seems to be more "on-topic". This is because there is no guarantee that any URLs or email addresses within the page have anything to do with the actual page content itself.
Outside of user posts,/. has little genuine unique content. It summarizes a lot of headlines; this content is not unique.
Other (large) factors determine the way Google ranks pages, including the "PageRank" feature. There are lots of documents about the way Google ranks sites, I suggest to check them out. The best way is probably to Google for it:).
Anyway, this is a bit more on-topic:
I highly appreciate Google's caching feature, and don't see how it can be taken as "bad".
This is what's "bad" about Google and what I expect that, at some point, will come to haunt them. For instance, if I want to get serial numbers without porn popups, I can usually search for something like "Office XP Serial Number Serialz Warez" or something similar. Within the first couple of pages, I will probably find my serial number in the text of the page description.
If not, it's on the page, oftentimes without a popup, since the serial/crack page itself is the one linked.
Want to find X-Win32? How about doing "* * * * * * xwin32*.exe" - lets get some directory listings containing this filename.
No doubt this proves that Google is more than just a search machine... but I think that their superior techniques will definitely come back to haunt them in the future. NYT is way off target with bitching about their caching features... you can turn this off easily, and there are a plethora of scripts one can use to break out of Google's cache and send someone to the main site (or, perhaps, login area in the case of NYT).
But, in other news, Google might need to watch out...
Slashdot Mirror
Well here's an example of a nice SQL thing that I got in the email from a sysadmin friend of mine. Feel free to mod this as "Funny" -- it doesn't fit anything else... I feel sorry for this dude.
... doesn't it end up being easier reading the documentation for the SQL products themselves? SQL is one of the few languages I would argue actually does *not* need a book. Reading a PHP/Perl book about any RDBMS using SQL would enlighten one as to the basic functionality; all further research could be done on the site of the RDBMS of choice. Yes, this would imply that they end up learning implementation specific SQL, but as long as one sticks to the "basic guidelines" found in the aforementioned books, one should be able to write fairly portable SQL, and fairly quickly.
No, really, it's not funny, it's a good idea. It'd be a nice research project to put up a "Google honeypot" of sorts with fake directory indices, "hacker tricks" (as are here so deemed) and the like. Get a few people to link to it and see what kind of activity is found. I think this would also accurately poll the cracker levels at Google, assuming you had "keyword rich honey" (for lack of a better description).
Perhaps I'll do this.
I regarding the ability to use Google as a warez search machine. The article was about Google censorship and the one response to my post pinpointed almost exactly the point that I brought up, which is the point discussed in this article.
Google has a nice long list of directory lists containing warez (remember the days of l33t FTP searching for filenames? Google for something like, in my last article: "xwin32*.exe * * * * *" "listing of"), serial numbers (Oh, I've found XP's serial number several times in Google's cache) and other "sensitive" information. My question is if other commercial sites are being constantly shut down due to these links (intentional or not), why aren't people targeting Google as well?
In fact, if I'm *cough*too cheap to buy software*cough* or just want to evaluate some crippleware or such before I buy it, I often skip astalavista and cracks.am and just Google it up. Saves me the porn and pop ups, and I don't have to cripple my browser for this (yes I know it's possible to do in other ways, yes I enjoy javascript, no thanks, I don't want comments about how I'm retarded because I don't do it the right way).
This is similar for sites such as the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine that contains other sensitive information.
Because of the academic merit of both of these search mechanisms, I doubt either one will be shut down. Indeed, I highly doubt restrictions will be placed. They're valuable tools for finding more valuable tools. For more information about this sort of stuff, I suggest searching on Fravia+'s web-searching lore. Other information on there relates to "reality cracking", reverse engineering, and other taboo topics. Google's got it all cached. Interested? Just search for (insert topic here) site:searchlores.org.
Sometimes I don't think the comparison of Google to God is that far off. Pardon my heresy.
Thanks for the compliment. I do believe that the actor portraying Peter R. de Vries used it in the "correct" manner as you've described. As an American who's been in Holland for a little over 1.5 years, I must say that my Dutch grammar isn't completely perfect yet :). Of course, this ehhhh (English fails me at the moment) uitzending of the program was probably 8 or 9 months ago (last season), so it isn't exactly fresh.
:)
Bedankt
One should not have to formally request the source. The source distribution must be easily obtainable. I doubt that dealing with the hassles of a merged (read: taken over) company's customer service (who probably know nothing of the case) will pass as "easy going". Of course, IANAL :(.
Additionally docs.sun.com has all the information you could possibly want about ANYTHING Sun (even REALLY old stuff).
;).
I think this book has somewhat poor timing. Solaris 10 is already being released for piloting. And if I weren't writing for Wiley (*not* a Dummies book) I would say that I hated the Dummies name as well
I'm sure that everybody's familiar with the output and quality of different various translators available online. I myself have been very interested in creating such a utility, and then one based on statistical language analysis. In my time in Holland, I've enjoyed learning the Dutch language, and have found online utilities to be of little help when translating documents (though I do not require this much anymore, it would have been helpful in the beginning).
...Maar ja, ik ben de niet roker van het jaar.
JS: Hoezo?
PRdV: Nou, ik rook 2 pakjes per dag... niet.
...Anyway, I'm the non smoker of the year.
JS: How do you figure that?
PRdV: Well, I ... don't ... smoke 2 packs per day.
Although these methods work better than literal word-for-word translation, they're still not going to be perfect without some sort of human intervention. Dutch, for instance, has a completely different sentence structure than does English. For instance, the sentence "The cow is going to jump over the moon." becomes "De koe gaat over de maan springen" or, literally, "The cow goes over the moon to jump".
Don't laugh at this structure or perhaps any unobvious usefulness. I've had discussions with people regarding the grammatical structure of a language and the society around it. Indeed, a specific example I have comes from a TV show "Kop Spijkers", which is a show focused mainly poking fun at political activity and news events. At times, they have people dressed as popular media and political figures and have comical debates.
In one show, a person acting as Peter R. de Vries (roughly the Dutch equivalent of William Shatner on America's Most Wanted) stated the following joke (JS stands for Jack Spijkerman, the host of the program):
PRdV:
Translated into English, we would not find the humor in this transaction:
PRdV:
Sure you can crack a smile about it, but it's much funnier when the punchline comes at a climax. And in English, it is not possible to state "Well, I smoke 2 packs per day... NOT" (without sounding like a retard who's watched too much Wayne's World).
Getting back on topic, I believe there will be major issues with any tranlsation algorithm to come. This is, of course, to be expected; I hope, however, that more advances will soon follow.
Well, you know you can make dynamic libraries and NOT compile them into the core language. Then you drop a .so file into the correct directory. And when you want to use it, you type dl('some_extension.so').
Java has many different DBI possibilities, at least as many as PHP has.
Yes you do have more problems with "portability" but that's expected, I guess. However, I don't know any widely used extensions that don't have binaries available for win32, linux, and bsd. Many even are packaged for Solaris on SPARC.
I won't comment on Java's performance, but you really do need a lot of nice hardware to run Java things well. It has lots of overhead.
So, when can I sign up for the email equivalent of this list? Granted I get enough Taiwanese junk, but that's the easiest to block. I'd love to be able to serve the people with the broken "Unsubscribe" URLs in their emails with a nice fine.
...Flash is not a closed format. The SWF file format is open, and if you have a good reason (i.e. one to boost their interests), macromedia will send you the source code to the player.
Of course you're going to have this. These companies spend millions of dollars making sure their pages are coming to the top of EVERY search engine, including Google. If somebody is searching for information about apples, they will search for "apples" not "apple". And if you search for "apples" you get a page entitled "Apples & More" with the description "Learn all about apples, growing and using them...".
The same can be said for the stupid comparison to flowers. Of the idiots who search for "flowers" for information about a research paper (those who know nothing about flowers), they will soon see that "information about flowers" "flower biology" and "flower development" turn up more relevent and less commercial terms.
Of course, if I searched for "design" I'd get a trillion pages about web design. But what if I was searching for "interior design". That's completely different.
It'd be sad if people were this stupid. But the reality is that people know what they're looking for and how to find it. I give this article a -1 STUPID.
To clarify this, I'm "using" Linux in a sense that I'm developing it and distributing it for money. Only the SMP 2.4 version. I'm not an end-user in this circumstance. I am sure I can goof with the SMP stuff in 2.2 to handle more CPUs, but it will definitely not be as robust.
This is not an end to anything. The worst that can happen is IBM loses 3 billion dollars, people who distribute 2.4 kernels for profit can be charged and Linux must re-write a few parts of code. It's not the end of an OS.
Although I don't see how this is a violation of the GPL as many of you are suggesting. If the stuff is copyrighted by SCO, SCO hasn't expressly (i.e. on paper with a signature) allowed use of their code in Linux and the Linux code is using SCO's code, then that code is under SCO's license. The illegality here would then be that the code has been stolen and relicensed under a license that SCO isn't favoring. In other words: if it's SCO's code, and SCO says so, it's got no right in Linux.
SCO does have copyrights to the code. If they use them, don't whine. If you used my code in your stuff, and I didn't write you express permission with a signature, I'd sue you too.
It's starting to slow down. I've got it mirrored at http://www.sitetronics.com/www.sentex.net/%7Emwand el/tech/tech.html
In fact, I have the whole site mirrored, if you're interested in it. It's got really neat stuff.
For what it's worth, this is not a large project for any large company. But I'd rather play it safe now. Getting one of those stupid SCO letters isn't on my agenda, considering that I'd have to go to court and I don't, at the time, live in America.
I imagine other people who are providing commercial Linux solutions are holding back a little bit until this gets resolved. I can imagine that a company whining so much at this point will only whine ore if they do win the case and find people who didn't stop before they did. Their receiving ownership the copyrights on that code doesn't help much either, since my project makes use of SMP and JFS.
Until things are cleared up, I think I'd rather be safe than sorry.
On alt.os.development, we've been discussing this somewhat humorously. It will eventually not be a problem. Linux will be able to simply rewrite its SMP handling (and other things that have allegedly been taken from SCO). In fact, at the OS level, working with 32 processors is no different from working with 2 (which Linux could already do before the alleged copyright infringement). However, handling 32 processors very well is a completely different story.
In any case, this is a big inconvenience for many people using Linux in their companies. I have to stop development on one of my projects because I don't want to pay SCO any money to use Linux. And why should I? Linux is supposed to be free. (All the more reason to use BSD, which I like more than Linux, but anyway...)
SCO is screaming to be bought out by IBM, even though they say in a press release that this is highly unlikely. It seems obvious to me, in any case -- SCO's not had a very successful product in a very long time.
Here's hoping that the case goes to a court where there are people who know what they're talking about are presiding on the jury.
And somebody please fill me in, but is the SCO hotshot lawyer who lost the Gore case against Florida and worked against Microsoft such a hotshot? It seems to me that he's more of a loser.
My 2 cents.
Because in places where the LGPL is used, there's a clear marker of the specific version of the LGPL. Shortly after that, there is text stating that one may use this version, or to their discresion any other later version of the license when interpreting the licensing agreement. In which case, we come to 2 conclusions:
In any of these cases, there's nothing wrong. Either it's supposed to have this behavior. Or not.
"Yes but"(tm)
In a couple of years time, BushCo will be gone. Everybody regrets voting for that wanker (everyone I've talked to, anyway). I mean, I don't think anybody with such a resume would really get re-elected. But then again, you never know.
In any case, it'd be super difficult to do any black ops involving the president at a time when presidential change is just coming closer. Sure bills can get pushed through congress super fast, but things like this one will take time, and there's no guarantee that Bush will still be there when this bill or other ones like it finally make it through.
On the other hand, our government does really weird things...
Well I guess that's the way it sounds, but I was hoping they'd answer in a somewhat esoteric manner; I guess my questions really have to do more with understanding why they've come to the conclusions they have about the laws that are in place than asking what the laws are in the first place.
And the Palladium question is an IP question -- simply asking what their opinion is on it.
And if they can't answer the questions, oh well. I had my fun :).
Is there any sense as to the actual guidance of the cryptography export laws? As an American citizen living in the Netherlands, I've been faced with a lot of problems, especially in this area. For instance, I'm legally unable to get source code for projects such as Kerberos (although it's been possible "through other people." I don't get the feeling people take this very seriously, and was wondering what you guys thought.
How do you wish to punish cyber criminals coming from other countries? For instance, if a Dutch hacker cracks a US corporate server (ignoring US/Dutch relations for a bit), would it be possible to prosecute this person? Are there UN regulations for computer "terrorism" (as I'm sure Bush would have it called, ehehe :)
What are your perspective's of Microsoft's Palladium technology and it's legalitites?
How often do internet security cases get tried?
I'm sure I could go on with tons more, but I think this is probably enough.
I get the feeling that they're suggesting with their page that they're doing a trial of their algorithm, not providing some kind of web browser that will be released for popular use. The ideas I get from a license requesting feedback and from the page (after the 5 minute load time) don't necessarily point me in that direction of thinking. However, I see three paths for this tool to follow:
I don't have their page open anymore, and I won't wait for it to load again, but I remember reading a sentence to the effect of "This web browser is testing our new PARC technology." I honestly don't think they're stupid enough to be trying to market a web browser with this.
I've not downloaded this product, but considering that people have mentioned that it requires a JVM... I'm not sure this is such a smart move, considering that Java can be decompiled super-easily. Unless, of course, they've already got that patent...
Anyway, it'll be interesting to see what they end up doing with this.
I'm an American citizen living abroad, heh. I don't care what type of system I'll need to be using. I'm sure they'll get it straight if I press the button 10 times ;). And I really don't care if anybody knows who I vote for, or why.
One thing I *do* want to know is whether or not I come from one of the qualified counties, since I'll probably still be here in November, 2004. I'd better get more info :-\
Just FYI, this behavior is due to the fact that Googlebot has a sort of "built-in" mechanism to ignore (or at least rank lower) forum-type sites. Since /. is primarily a "news headline and discussion" site, Google will not rank it as highly as one that seems to be more "on-topic". This is because there is no guarantee that any URLs or email addresses within the page have anything to do with the actual page content itself.
Outside of user posts, /. has little genuine unique content. It summarizes a lot of headlines; this content is not unique.
Other (large) factors determine the way Google ranks pages, including the "PageRank" feature. There are lots of documents about the way Google ranks sites, I suggest to check them out. The best way is probably to Google for it :).
Anyway, this is a bit more on-topic:
I highly appreciate Google's caching feature, and don't see how it can be taken as "bad".
This is what's "bad" about Google and what I expect that, at some point, will come to haunt them. For instance, if I want to get serial numbers without porn popups, I can usually search for something like "Office XP Serial Number Serialz Warez" or something similar. Within the first couple of pages, I will probably find my serial number in the text of the page description.
If not, it's on the page, oftentimes without a popup, since the serial/crack page itself is the one linked.
Want to find X-Win32? How about doing "* * * * * * xwin32*.exe" - lets get some directory listings containing this filename.
No doubt this proves that Google is more than just a search machine... but I think that their superior techniques will definitely come back to haunt them in the future. NYT is way off target with bitching about their caching features... you can turn this off easily, and there are a plethora of scripts one can use to break out of Google's cache and send someone to the main site (or, perhaps, login area in the case of NYT).
But, in other news, Google might need to watch out...