Does anyone know what limits are placed on the urls that are sent to Google(and with IE7 Microsoft)? I figure that if these companies wanted to they could use all these urls to piece together what the most popular search results should be for any query. Even if these companies could not do this, a community-based, properly anonymizing service could almost replace any search engine on the planet by tracking what keywords lead to what websites people click on. Has anyone heard of this idea or has it been shot down for some other reason besides the privacy concerns?
is that you give your data over to a company you may or may not trust. Php packages like Wordpress, Metawiki, and Drupal have shown that hosting your own service with standard, open-source software can be a great thing. Why are there no popular open source office suites that you can host on your own server? The time is right.
Education is not about filling a role. It's also not about setting a trajectory whatever that means.
Education is about inspiring each student to do their best. Point out the flaws in their work and challenge them to go beyond what they and others have done before.
This is the perfect setup for a kids/parents technology arms race. First, convince alarmed parents that they need to pay for some monitoring of their child's online behavior. Then sell a monitor blocking package to the children. A key feature of the latter has got to be that you can use the saved credit card credentials from the parents puchase.
Mass user flight in 3......2.......1......
I agree with your point that hacking many platforms is difficult but that people are doing it is probably the best way to improve the hackability of future platforms. If hardware vendors see hackability as a desired feature, they will enable it.
My original reason for replying was just to counter the impression that running homebrew on the DS(including http://dslinux.org/) no longer requires flashing the firmware or taking the chance that you'll brick your hardware. The latest NoPass devices, let you run applications from an sd or cd or minisd card via other cards and can even increase the RAM available to homebrew. Once again, no flashing necessary. Happy hacking.
You make a good point if the machine is the source of the problem. I guess I assumed there'd be some human behind the problem of votes being counted wrongly. People have motives that machines do not so the automatic recount is designed to control for the human involvement. It's not to say that ballots won't be sorted and removed but just that the process of cheating becomes more difficult when there are automatic recounts.
Machines have saved us a lot of time. I think reinvesting some of that time could have tremendous benefits.
You know when they said you were special? They were trying to tell you to just do something different than everyone else. If everyone did a table trick or wrote "blank at blank dot com" or did any other clever little thing a programmer could come along and regex the hell out of it. Be unique and make them deal with your site individually.
That being said, I don't think spammers crawl the net looking for addresses so much. Their zombies have all the addresses they need. Just try to give out your email address to people that don't have an affinity for virus infections. In my case, I protect my customers so my address hasn't been abuse too heavily thus far.
I don't think Microsoft has intentions of being the next SCO. They just want a way to control some foothold of open source deployment. In process Novell is happy to get some solid sales going from their SUSE investment even if they piss off the open source world.
I don't see this as a dividing tactic but just a money making one. It's not as if half of the open source community is going to jump to proprietary software just because of one deal.
They should be mandatory. Every vote should be counted once in its home precinct and again at a randomly selected sister precinct that has compatible equipment. Then we'll see just how good our system works.
Maybe the way to get people into some new machines is to give them a genuinely new experience. You know the one with Ubuntu or SUSE installed, paying $50-100 less for that new PC, and no need for additional security software. Oh yeah...and no activation headaches.
Call me an idealist but it has to happen at some point. Maybe price pressures and demand falling off will drive the linux and free software adoption we've all been waiting for.
I would like to opt-in with one condition. MS should be limited to using only piecharts and spreadsheets on my data. No pivot tables, histograms, or Crystal Reports will be allowed to process my usage information.
I only like my data abused in certain ways for free. If they want to pay for the use of my data with the more powerful tools, I may decide to license them that right. They can call me and we'll negotiate an EULA.
I wonder how this project will manage to give a "web os" more power over hardware while not simultaneously throwing our security in the "web recycle bin".
IE had too much power over the OS and it caused problems. Firefox and IE7 do more to put some distance between the os and the web for good reason.
So year over year there something like 40-50% growth in the number of sites. The question is why? Do we all wake up in the morning thinking, "I wish there were more websites!"
This just reflects that more people are coming up with more ideas that include having their own little piece o' web. It's not important how many ideas people have or how many domains they run. It's how much time humanity is spending online that matters. It's how much good the internet is doing for us. Just wanted to point out the number is really irrelevant for human quality of life.
I find it funny that Google is telling Microsoft what it should be doing. Is this some kind of reverse psychology? Is Google trying to get MS to make Vista's search and browser required thereby making Google's yet-to-be-released gorgeous, better, and free(beer and freedom) OS even more attractive? You decide.
The internet with its vastly improved communications technology is doing two things at least. First, it's making the things people used to do locally under fair use a global threat to the value of the traditional distribution schemes. Secondly, the seriouslness of the threat is causing all those lawyers who thought they were protecting content with their licenses to realize it wasn't their work at all that protected content. It was the difficulty of distribution.
So lawyers are being taken to the mat everywhere and they're doing what they can. In this case, I doubt it's going to have much effect. There are other sites and even on YouTube the volume of uploads would overwhelm any number of people they put in charge of looking for copyrighted content. They could moderate all video posts to deal with the traffic but it's all just a sideshow. YouTube isn't competing against another couple of large video sites with similar constraints to them. It's competing against another model...one of thousands of smaller video sites, all indexed, and rated by the community. YouTube's challenge is to demostrate that they are providing value even to those whose copyrighted content they are distributing. The happy medium may be one where best of clips are allowed but no complete works without a subscription.
Guess we'll all see how it goes...
then why aren't they just developed more fully into robotic suicide bombers?
I think one of the main features that has led to mine proliferation is their relative cost-effectiveness. If these things can hop around *in the direction they choose*, wouldn't that make them prohibitively expensive?
I'd like to see this study done in the real world by a movie studio: Take two similarly popular movies that are projected to perform similarly in revenues over the next few months. Then release both in DVD with all the appropriate promo deals and merchandising. Finally, offer one for free download from their official website via bittorrent or even an easier http download. After a few months they can measure the revenues of each movie. Now, do you think they'd actually do that study? What do you think would be the result?
go to the artist, then look for sites that offer a larger cut to the artist.
I don't know of any at the moment but it can't be that hard to setup a site that allows the consumer to download with payment and the artist to setup a simple pay-per-click marketing campaign. I'm sure the artist can get more than 0.11 cents out of the dollar.
of a lint collector. It seems like we're always hearing about technologies that will make better biological sensors. You'd think by now we could pee in a cup to know if we had trace amounts of cancer already. I'm hoping and praying that the next article I read like this says "Nanotube Cancer Bio-sensor Debuts on Amazon" but I'm not holding my breath.
I think the biggest problem with typo-sqauatting and the nastier problem(for web developers) of domain-squatting is that it wastes people's time. It's like traffic when you're on the highway. Wouldn't it be great if you could just make traffic illegal one day? I understand the problem...how can you tell if someone is typo-squatting or doing an original website?
It's actually quite easy. It should be based on content. If all you see is a list of search categories and lots of ads, it's typo-squatting. If you see original articles and compelling content, it's legit.
Slashdot Mirror
Does anyone know what limits are placed on the urls that are sent to Google(and with IE7 Microsoft)? I figure that if these companies wanted to they could use all these urls to piece together what the most popular search results should be for any query. Even if these companies could not do this, a community-based, properly anonymizing service could almost replace any search engine on the planet by tracking what keywords lead to what websites people click on. Has anyone heard of this idea or has it been shot down for some other reason besides the privacy concerns?
is that you give your data over to a company you may or may not trust. Php packages like Wordpress, Metawiki, and Drupal have shown that hosting your own service with standard, open-source software can be a great thing. Why are there no popular open source office suites that you can host on your own server? The time is right.
Education is not about filling a role. It's also not about setting a trajectory whatever that means.
Education is about inspiring each student to do their best. Point out the flaws in their work and challenge them to go beyond what they and others have done before.
This is the perfect setup for a kids/parents technology arms race. First, convince alarmed parents that they need to pay for some monitoring of their child's online behavior. Then sell a monitor blocking package to the children. A key feature of the latter has got to be that you can use the saved credit card credentials from the parents puchase. Mass user flight in 3......2.......1......
I agree with your point that hacking many platforms is difficult but that people are doing it is probably the best way to improve the hackability of future platforms. If hardware vendors see hackability as a desired feature, they will enable it. My original reason for replying was just to counter the impression that running homebrew on the DS(including http://dslinux.org/) no longer requires flashing the firmware or taking the chance that you'll brick your hardware. The latest NoPass devices, let you run applications from an sd or cd or minisd card via other cards and can even increase the RAM available to homebrew. Once again, no flashing necessary. Happy hacking.
We don't want our smoking gun to be an undisclosed balance sheet liability.
You make a good point if the machine is the source of the problem. I guess I assumed there'd be some human behind the problem of votes being counted wrongly. People have motives that machines do not so the automatic recount is designed to control for the human involvement. It's not to say that ballots won't be sorted and removed but just that the process of cheating becomes more difficult when there are automatic recounts.
Machines have saved us a lot of time. I think reinvesting some of that time could have tremendous benefits.
You know when they said you were special? They were trying to tell you to just do something different than everyone else. If everyone did a table trick or wrote "blank at blank dot com" or did any other clever little thing a programmer could come along and regex the hell out of it. Be unique and make them deal with your site individually.
That being said, I don't think spammers crawl the net looking for addresses so much. Their zombies have all the addresses they need. Just try to give out your email address to people that don't have an affinity for virus infections. In my case, I protect my customers so my address hasn't been abuse too heavily thus far.
I don't think Microsoft has intentions of being the next SCO. They just want a way to control some foothold of open source deployment. In process Novell is happy to get some solid sales going from their SUSE investment even if they piss off the open source world.
I don't see this as a dividing tactic but just a money making one. It's not as if half of the open source community is going to jump to proprietary software just because of one deal.
They should be mandatory. Every vote should be counted once in its home precinct and again at a randomly selected sister precinct that has compatible equipment. Then we'll see just how good our system works.
Maybe the way to get people into some new machines is to give them a genuinely new experience. You know the one with Ubuntu or SUSE installed, paying $50-100 less for that new PC, and no need for additional security software. Oh yeah...and no activation headaches.
Call me an idealist but it has to happen at some point. Maybe price pressures and demand falling off will drive the linux and free software adoption we've all been waiting for.
Windows Mozilla Software Removal Tool
I would like to opt-in with one condition. MS should be limited to using only piecharts and spreadsheets on my data. No pivot tables, histograms, or Crystal Reports will be allowed to process my usage information.
I only like my data abused in certain ways for free. If they want to pay for the use of my data with the more powerful tools, I may decide to license them that right. They can call me and we'll negotiate an EULA.
I wonder how this project will manage to give a "web os" more power over hardware while not simultaneously throwing our security in the "web recycle bin".
IE had too much power over the OS and it caused problems. Firefox and IE7 do more to put some distance between the os and the web for good reason.
So year over year there something like 40-50% growth in the number of sites. The question is why? Do we all wake up in the morning thinking, "I wish there were more websites!"
This just reflects that more people are coming up with more ideas that include having their own little piece o' web. It's not important how many ideas people have or how many domains they run. It's how much time humanity is spending online that matters. It's how much good the internet is doing for us. Just wanted to point out the number is really irrelevant for human quality of life.
That is, unless you own a hosting company.
I find it funny that Google is telling Microsoft what it should be doing. Is this some kind of reverse psychology? Is Google trying to get MS to make Vista's search and browser required thereby making Google's yet-to-be-released gorgeous, better, and free(beer and freedom) OS even more attractive? You decide.
The internet with its vastly improved communications technology is doing two things at least. First, it's making the things people used to do locally under fair use a global threat to the value of the traditional distribution schemes. Secondly, the seriouslness of the threat is causing all those lawyers who thought they were protecting content with their licenses to realize it wasn't their work at all that protected content. It was the difficulty of distribution. So lawyers are being taken to the mat everywhere and they're doing what they can. In this case, I doubt it's going to have much effect. There are other sites and even on YouTube the volume of uploads would overwhelm any number of people they put in charge of looking for copyrighted content. They could moderate all video posts to deal with the traffic but it's all just a sideshow. YouTube isn't competing against another couple of large video sites with similar constraints to them. It's competing against another model...one of thousands of smaller video sites, all indexed, and rated by the community. YouTube's challenge is to demostrate that they are providing value even to those whose copyrighted content they are distributing. The happy medium may be one where best of clips are allowed but no complete works without a subscription. Guess we'll all see how it goes...
7 eats 9. 6 calls po-po.
I think one of the main features that has led to mine proliferation is their relative cost-effectiveness. If these things can hop around *in the direction they choose*, wouldn't that make them prohibitively expensive?
I'd like to see this study done in the real world by a movie studio: Take two similarly popular movies that are projected to perform similarly in revenues over the next few months. Then release both in DVD with all the appropriate promo deals and merchandising. Finally, offer one for free download from their official website via bittorrent or even an easier http download. After a few months they can measure the revenues of each movie. Now, do you think they'd actually do that study? What do you think would be the result?
I don't know of any at the moment but it can't be that hard to setup a site that allows the consumer to download with payment and the artist to setup a simple pay-per-click marketing campaign. I'm sure the artist can get more than 0.11 cents out of the dollar.
of a lint collector. It seems like we're always hearing about technologies that will make better biological sensors. You'd think by now we could pee in a cup to know if we had trace amounts of cancer already. I'm hoping and praying that the next article I read like this says "Nanotube Cancer Bio-sensor Debuts on Amazon" but I'm not holding my breath.
It's actually quite easy. It should be based on content. If all you see is a list of search categories and lots of ads, it's typo-squatting. If you see original articles and compelling content, it's legit.
when you've got such a sprite-scattering issue? If so, I'd like to declare success on my overclocked TI-82 that promptly burst into flames in 2004.
Tridge is Free-Man!