Oh naive curr. This is not your fathers Internet where running code and rough consensus meant anything. I'm sure with the proper publicity photos, you tube videos and social media consultancy this project can be hi profile, media centric and the darling of those who tweet.
Whats usability or performance go to with anything today? Hell, this is one of the mild examples.
I'm surprised ICANN hasn't already contacted them for their new language registry yet. Better get certified quick before the price goes up.
"I'm guessing you don't even know what fair use is if you're willing to make such an insane claim."
Never guess. I know how fair use and fair dealing apply in a couple of countries, and while I couldn't tell you how it works in, say Iceland, I understand what the law says and more importantly what it's supposed to do.... and the skepticism the law has for monopoly control.
If you can show no harm to the music industry and in fact show its thriving then this becomes an issue of If you can show no harm to the music industry and in fact show its thriving then this becomes an issue of anti-competative action as a new paradigm could very well easily coalesce out of the tattered shreds of the RIAAs monopoly; that's what they're fighting for, their right to monopolize and to prevent some sort of innovation that will replace them.anti-competative action as a new paradigm could very well easily coalesce out of the tattered shreds of the RIAAs monopoly; that's what they're fighting for, their right to monopolize and to prevent some sort of innovation that will replace them.
If you're going to tell me it's about parody and excerpts, go read a bit more. There are constitutional vs. statutory issues for one thing.
I've read every word in this whole thread, twice and can't see anything that isn't an appeal to authority, my least favorite form of logical fallacy.
Regarding this: "Get your head out of the sand, people! Even if you personally don't care about warming or cooling of our world, you should be worried about stuff like increased acidification of the ocean."
A decade or more ago concern was raised that incresing Co2 would kill of the coral in the Indian ocean and sho' nuff a bunch had died off. Then (despite increasing co2 levels) it grew back.
Now, of this increased co2 killed it, why does more make it come back?
Or just maybe, was something else responsible for it dying off in the first place?
I'm not sure about this global warming thing yet. But self-inconsistant claims sure don't help.
Interesting guess but I don't think so. One of the other 4 poeple is somebody I know, the other two I'd never seen before. That had to have come from the adserver. I'm guessing they all did.
I know what I agreed to when I clicked the thinger in facebook. You show me where is says personal likeness in commercial conduct is authorized.
Oh yeah, Jenine is Nat Torkington's wife. She's pissed. And she's not somebody you want pissed at you.
It's not a question of freedom. If MS's stuff worked half as well as unix I wouldn't care. But I hate MS like I hate Ford. My experiience with their products has been overwhelmingly negative.
Here's where I found my face on an ad on slashdot in late may. Using liknesses for commercial purposes requires a model release and this is actionable. Anybody feel like doing a class action?
The best first language is assembler so you know how computers really work. If you don't learn this you'll always be at a disadvantage to somebody that knows assembler.
After that learn C, (not C++) so you understand how it's shorthand for C. No, it actually is.
Now maybe server software won't be so obscenely bloated.
"What you're not seeing is Google's strategic intent (I work for Google, but this stuff is public).
Google's goal is to commodify (reduce the marginal profit to zero) of everything that they don't make money on. The hardware is pretty much commodified already. Plenty of competitors and the profit margins are razor thin. Next levels are the OS and the applications. These are not yet commodified due to Microsoft's aggressively maintained monopoly. Contrary to common knowledge, Microsoft's real monopoly is in the Office file formats. From that, they've levered a monopoly into basic individual productivity applications and then (with Apple's cooperation) the operating system. They are also a serious player in second-generation collaboration tools (extensions to basic email)."
Dear Google; Could you please compete with ICANN next? 500 ninnies are gonna plonk down a million dollars each (a half a billion for something I did once in an evening?!?) and with your servers and common snese it would really save some money.
And the international tld guys could use some help too, they spent 10 years making tlds work in 11 languages and now icann want to charge them $50K per 2 line table entry in one file on a computer that they don't even run. It shouldn't cost $150 million just so people can read the net in their own language especially when their people spent so much time and money doing the actual work.
But if you think icann needs two billion dollars more to run around the world ignoring poeple, carry on.
"If something taught us SMTP is that is not panacea, there is a big hole in that specification and is called "real time" (well, if you want, add spam to the mix). Wave goes directly to the heart of it, having communication between one or several people (like smtp), but in real time, adding authentication, easy to use and powerful web interface, multimedia and more things that will be disclosed/developed in time. And takes on instant messaging/xmpp if you want too, adding things that are more from smtp realm"
No, what smtp and ftp and even dns taught is is we don't need them any more, http can do all this just fine.
who cares it's a crap protocol written by a psych major that was barely appropriate for the glass crt 24x80 world and had to be extended bizarrely to do anything useful and took 20 years to get a decent daemon on certain platforms.
maybe wave isn't the end all be all, maybe it's the multics that causes unix to be born or maybe wave will be the shizzle.
the sooner i can break away from this spam infested, made worse by anti-spam (oh look the worst of both worlds) nightmare of 1976 technology, the better.
"Right now, my chain goes: Operating System -> Windowing System -> Application or Operating System -> Windowing System -> Virtual Machine -> Application Google Wave is several abstractions farther down the chain: Operating System -> Windowing System -> Browser -> Virtual Machine -> Google Wave -> Application"
Na, if you really want shame on ICANN it's for that bilderberg-clinton-bildt-dyson connection. If the tinfoil crew get hold of this they'll get anonymous to do something awful and it will make a big miss. Even the appearance of these sorts of things shouldn't exist.
And if you're going to have a regulatory clusterfuck like ICANN manage a franchise like.com and since it seems to fit the definition of a franchise under the FTC, have them regulate it. They sorta have a legal obligation to, and they don't need a burn rate of $250K a day to do it.
"With Network Solutions, they will keep that expired domain around for me to renew, even after it expires. So I don't loose it to a cyber squatter. I've seen this with domains I've deliberately let go. If they aren't allowed to do this, then I'm screwed if I forget to renew one of my domains. I'm with the registrars on this one. It is a nice security feature."
What I find interesting is the original article was about a specific not so great registrar, which quickly morphed into an all out frontal attack on godaddy seemingly because of the bredth of dismay, with a twinge of the very predictable "oh and screw verisign too" for nothing other than a suspicion.
But I'll second the above, I feel like I have a fighting chance with NSI.
I still haven't got used to calling them verisign and I probably wont.
FTC disclaimer v1.0: just a happy customer.
Having said that, I still think this whole registrar registry split has been more trouble that it's worth if you were to actually measure it. All it's done is prove you can get worse service for less money. Frankly I could have guessed that.
"ICANN needs to figure out an enforcement policy. Perhaps it should order the root servers to stop accepting new registrations from registrars not following the rules" "
Nomenclatural nit: root servers contain lists of tld servers, the servers that serve up com/net/org/de/uk etc.
You mean "tld servers" not "root servers".
But, the real way they do this is send a letter to the registrar telling them to knock it off. If they don't they can pull their accreditation and the registrar is no longer a registrar.
"The fact that they get paid per domain of course is what gives them the motivation to dramatically increase the TLD space to the point where the whole concept of a TLD is completely meaningless. This also is a flawed part of the system."
They do get paid per domain, twenty cents or so (and why this isn't an illegal tax like the NSF/NSI "intellectual infrastructure fund" was - same thing - I don't know) but I would hardly say this is why ICANN wants to make new tlds.
They don't really. They've been around 11 years and were tasked by the us government in 1998 to set up a process to make new tlds. Whether they want to or not should be irrelevant.
But, large trademark and intellectual property interests have stalled this for a decade.
Wired Magazine ran an article recently "100 things your kids will never see" and #43 was "domains made from recognizable words", falling under the "all the good names are taken" battle cry which originated in 1997.
The registrars that appear to run icann do not. Nobody has any influence over ican, they make decisions, and deals in secret then ask for public comment and ignore it.
Look at what Karl Aurbach said:
I've been collecting Sims statements for years, and because I'm on the Board of Directors of ICANN I have had the opportunity to see how he purveys his ever-shifted message to those who could discharge him from his job. I am reminded less of Othello and more of Iago - with the Internet taking the role of Desdemona. ICANN was the creation of a septic conception. ICANN was constructed in secrecy. Favored groups, euphemistically and inaccurately called "stakeholders", were selected. Secret deals were made. Comments from the public were allowed - but they remained merely comments and they were completely ignored - setting the precedent for the submit-into-the-dumpster kind of public "forum" process that remains standard practice in the ICANN of today. How do I know this? Jon Postel asked Sims to speak to me. When Sims finally did, he informed me that virtually every important decision had been made and that changes were impossible because it would require too many changes to the deals that had already been made. What those deals were, and with whom, and with what quid-pro-quos, is something that has never been revealed, although a few outlines have been seen. ICANN loves to wave the word "consensus" - but it is consensus among a chosen few.
"The entire purpose of the Domain Name System is, or was, to enforce structure in naming on the Internet. "
Not. There are no documents anywhere that support this idea.
The purpose of the DNS is to be able to find computers on the network with easy to remember names, instead of IP addresses.
The (very) rough breakdown of top level domains in categories was arbitrary and capricious. Postel came up with com/net/org and evrybody hated it on the one mailing list on the net at the time "the message group" but he went ahead with it anyway. The Brits really objected as they'd been using uk.* hostnames, so he gave them.uk then found the iso-3166 list and made up a two letter domain for every country on it.
There never was an organizational plan or ontology using the DNS. The closest you'd find is draft-higgs from about 95/96 but that was shot down by the IAHC plan which was shot down by the USG to make ICANN.
"Loss=heat, I doubt the cladding would stand up very well to that kind of loss. In my experience solid state lasers aren't very reliable even at fairly low power. In networking gear GBIC's/SFP's are by far the least reliable components, dying far more often then even mechanical components like fans and probably on par with enterprise HDD's."
"SCA is not ancient or historical. It's an excuse for Internet Tough Guy to put on black leather, take a few tokes, and finally make it with that weird chick at the pet store."
Slashdot Mirror
Praise be to Dan and may peace be upon him.
Oh naive curr. This is not your fathers Internet where running code and rough consensus meant anything. I'm sure with the proper publicity photos, you tube videos and social media consultancy this project can be hi profile, media centric and the darling of those who tweet.
Whats usability or performance go to with anything today? Hell, this is one of the mild examples.
I'm surprised ICANN hasn't already contacted them for their new language registry yet. Better get certified quick before the price goes up.
I was gonna say it's like mail, usenet, facebook and cvs all rolled into one.
" I'm guessing you don't even know what fair use is if you're willing to make such an insane claim."
Never guess. I know how fair use and fair dealing apply in a couple of countries, and while I couldn't tell you how it works in, say Iceland, I understand what the law says and more importantly what it's supposed to do.... and the skepticism the law has for monopoly control.
If you can show no harm to the music industry and in fact show its thriving then this becomes an issue of If you can show no harm to the music industry and in fact show its thriving then this becomes an issue of anti-competative action as a new paradigm could very well easily coalesce out of the tattered shreds of the RIAAs monopoly; that's what they're fighting for, their right to monopolize and to prevent some sort of innovation that will replace them.anti-competative action as a new paradigm could very well easily coalesce out of the tattered shreds of the RIAAs monopoly; that's what they're fighting for, their right to monopolize and to prevent some sort of innovation that will replace them.
If you're going to tell me it's about parody and excerpts, go read a bit more. There are constitutional vs. statutory issues for one thing.
I've read every word in this whole thread, twice and can't see anything that isn't an appeal to authority, my least favorite form of logical fallacy.
Regarding this:
"Get your head out of the sand, people! Even if you personally don't care about warming or cooling of our world, you should be worried about stuff like increased acidification of the ocean."
A decade or more ago concern was raised that incresing Co2 would kill of the coral in the Indian ocean and sho' nuff a bunch had died off. Then (despite increasing co2 levels) it grew back.
Now, of this increased co2 killed it, why does more make it come back?
Or just maybe, was something else responsible for it dying off in the first place?
I'm not sure about this global warming thing yet. But self-inconsistant claims sure don't help.
And as with anything else: follow the money.
On the other hand, everybody shares music and sales haven't been devastated. You can't make illegal something everyone does, a mere vote fixes that.
I agree with Neeson that, circa 2010, sharing music is "fair use" under the ideals that is supposed to engender.
As a society we want to reward creativity, not encourage regulatory cartels.
Interesting guess but I don't think so. One of the other 4 poeple is somebody I know, the other two I'd never seen before. That had to have come from the adserver. I'm guessing they all did.
I know what I agreed to when I clicked the thinger in facebook. You show me where is says personal likeness in commercial conduct is authorized.
Oh yeah, Jenine is Nat Torkington's wife. She's pissed. And she's not somebody you want pissed at you.
It's not a question of freedom. If MS's stuff worked half as well as unix I wouldn't care. But I hate MS like I hate Ford. My experiience with their products has been overwhelmingly negative.
Just an observation...
http://rs79.vrx.net/.oops/yixe/
Here's where I found my face on an ad on slashdot in late may. Using liknesses for commercial purposes requires a model release and this is actionable. Anybody feel like doing a class action?
The best first language is assembler so you know how computers really work. If you don't learn this you'll always be at a disadvantage to somebody that knows assembler.
After that learn C, (not C++) so you understand how it's shorthand for C. No, it actually is.
Now maybe server software won't be so obscenely bloated.
"What you're not seeing is Google's strategic intent (I work for Google, but this stuff is public).
Google's goal is to commodify (reduce the marginal profit to zero) of everything that they don't make money on. The hardware is pretty much commodified already. Plenty of competitors and the profit margins are razor thin. Next levels are the OS and the applications. These are not yet commodified due to Microsoft's aggressively maintained monopoly. Contrary to common knowledge, Microsoft's real monopoly is in the Office file formats. From that, they've levered a monopoly into basic individual productivity applications and then (with Apple's cooperation) the operating system. They are also a serious player in second-generation collaboration tools (extensions to basic email)."
Dear Google;
Could you please compete with ICANN next? 500 ninnies are gonna plonk down a million dollars each (a half a billion for something I did once in an evening?!?) and with your servers and common snese it would really save some money.
And the international tld guys could use some help too, they spent 10 years making tlds work in 11 languages and now icann want to charge them $50K per 2 line table entry in one file on a computer that they don't even run. It shouldn't cost $150 million just so people can read the net in their own language especially when their people spent so much time and money doing the actual work.
But if you think icann needs two billion dollars more to run around the world ignoring poeple, carry on.
Thanks,
the net
"If something taught us SMTP is that is not panacea, there is a big hole in that specification and is called "real time" (well, if you want, add spam to the mix). Wave goes directly to the heart of it, having communication between one or several people (like smtp), but in real time, adding authentication, easy to use and powerful web interface, multimedia and more things that will be disclosed/developed in time. And takes on instant messaging/xmpp if you want too, adding things that are more from smtp realm"
No, what smtp and ftp and even dns taught is is we don't need them any more, http can do all this just fine.
"SMTP is in beta?"
who cares it's a crap protocol written by a psych major that was barely appropriate for the glass crt 24x80 world and had to be extended bizarrely to do anything useful and took 20 years to get a decent daemon on certain platforms.
maybe wave isn't the end all be all, maybe it's the multics that causes unix to be born or maybe wave will be the shizzle.
the sooner i can break away from this spam infested, made worse by anti-spam (oh look the worst of both worlds) nightmare of 1976 technology, the better.
" Right now, my chain goes:
Operating System -> Windowing System -> Application
or
Operating System -> Windowing System -> Virtual Machine -> Application
Google Wave is several abstractions farther down the chain:
Operating System -> Windowing System -> Browser -> Virtual Machine -> Google Wave -> Application "
Yeah.
What I want is:
BIOS --> that shit they had in minority report
Try http://www.dynadot.com/ and verisign seem to be ok. I dunno about the rest.
Na, if you really want shame on ICANN it's for that bilderberg-clinton-bildt-dyson connection. If the tinfoil crew get hold of this they'll get anonymous to do something awful and it will make a big miss. Even the appearance of these sorts of things shouldn't exist.
And if you're going to have a regulatory clusterfuck like ICANN manage a franchise like .com and since it seems to fit the definition of a franchise under the FTC, have them regulate it. They sorta have a legal obligation to, and they don't need a burn rate of $250K a day to do it.
"With Network Solutions, they will keep that expired domain around for me to renew, even after it expires. So I don't loose it to a cyber squatter. I've seen this with domains I've deliberately let go. If they aren't allowed to do this, then I'm screwed if I forget to renew one of my domains. I'm with the registrars on this one. It is a nice security feature."
What I find interesting is the original article was about a specific not so great registrar, which quickly morphed into an all out frontal attack on godaddy seemingly because of the bredth of dismay, with a twinge of the very predictable "oh and screw verisign too" for nothing other than a suspicion.
But I'll second the above, I feel like I have a fighting chance with NSI.
I still haven't got used to calling them verisign and I probably wont.
FTC disclaimer v1.0: just a happy customer.
Having said that, I still think this whole registrar registry split has been more trouble that it's worth if you were to actually measure it. All it's done is prove you can get worse service for less money. Frankly I could have guessed that.
" ICANN needs to figure out an enforcement policy. Perhaps it should order the root servers to stop accepting new registrations from registrars not following the rules" "
Nomenclatural nit: root servers contain lists of tld servers, the servers that serve up com/net/org/de/uk etc.
You mean "tld servers" not "root servers".
But, the real way they do this is send a letter to the registrar telling them to knock it off. If they don't they can pull their accreditation and the registrar is no longer a registrar.
There is a contracts enforcement officer at ICANN. You can see him in the video on the botto mof this page: http://rs79.vrx.net/opinions/internet/domains/eyestar/icann/inside/
" The fact that they get paid per domain of course is what gives them the motivation to dramatically increase the TLD space to the point where the whole concept of a TLD is completely meaningless. This also is a flawed part of the system."
They do get paid per domain, twenty cents or so (and why this isn't an illegal tax like the NSF/NSI "intellectual infrastructure fund" was - same thing - I don't know) but I would hardly say this is why ICANN wants to make new tlds.
They don't really. They've been around 11 years and were tasked by the us government in 1998 to set up a process to make new tlds. Whether they want to or not should be irrelevant.
But, large trademark and intellectual property interests have stalled this for a decade.
Wired Magazine ran an article recently "100 things your kids will never see" and #43 was "domains made from recognizable words", falling under the "all the good names are taken" battle cry which originated in 1997.
The registrars that appear to run icann do not. Nobody has any influence over ican, they make decisions, and deals in secret then ask for public comment and ignore it.
Look at what Karl Aurbach said:
I've been collecting Sims statements for years, and because I'm on the
Board of Directors of ICANN I have had the opportunity to see how he
purveys his ever-shifted message to those who could discharge him from his
job. I am reminded less of Othello and more of Iago - with the Internet
taking the role of Desdemona.
ICANN was the creation of a septic conception. ICANN was constructed in
secrecy. Favored groups, euphemistically and inaccurately called
"stakeholders", were selected. Secret deals were made. Comments from the
public were allowed - but they remained merely comments and they were
completely ignored - setting the precedent for the
submit-into-the-dumpster kind of public "forum" process that remains
standard practice in the ICANN of today.
How do I know this? Jon Postel asked Sims to speak to me. When Sims
finally did, he informed me that virtually every important decision had
been made and that changes were impossible because it would require too
many changes to the deals that had already been made. What those deals
were, and with whom, and with what quid-pro-quos, is something that has
never been revealed, although a few outlines have been seen.
ICANN loves to wave the word "consensus" - but it is consensus among a
chosen few.
" The entire purpose of the Domain Name System is, or was, to enforce structure in naming on the Internet. "
Not. There are no documents anywhere that support this idea.
The purpose of the DNS is to be able to find computers on the network with easy to remember names, instead of IP addresses.
The (very) rough breakdown of top level domains in categories was arbitrary and capricious. Postel came up with com/net/org and evrybody hated it on the one mailing list on the net at the time "the message group" but he went ahead with it anyway. The Brits really objected as they'd been using uk.* hostnames, so he gave them .uk then found the iso-3166 list and made up a two letter domain for every country on it.
There never was an organizational plan or ontology using the DNS. The closest you'd find is draft-higgs from about 95/96 but that was shot down by the IAHC plan which was shot down by the USG to make ICANN.
I agree in general with the rest of your post.
You call thatch a "roof"?
(I was born there I can say this. No malice intended.)
" Loss=heat, I doubt the cladding would stand up very well to that kind of loss. In my experience solid state lasers aren't very reliable even at fairly low power. In networking gear GBIC's/SFP's are by far the least reliable components, dying far more often then even mechanical components like fans and probably on par with enterprise HDD's."
You ever had a car with Lucas electrics?
" SCA is not ancient or historical. It's an excuse for Internet Tough Guy to put on black leather, take a few tokes, and finally make it with that weird chick at the pet store."
Oh rly? Where do I sign up?
" We don't have to carry umbrellas all the time -- we've had roofs for, ooh, years now."
Can central heating be far behind?
I found my namesake was an archer in 1441.
He was probably an asshole, too.