I recently got to hang out with an older gentleman of the redneck persuasion. He was bitterly complaining about the harassment that he received from airport security the day before. Upon further questioning, it turned out that he wasn't actually upset about getting harassed himself, but about the fact that they didn't visit enough harassment on the 'motherfucker in a turban' who was in line in front of him.
It's about economies of scale, and the convenience that comes with it.
If you set up a project on Sourceforge, or Google Code, or Github, you get a VCS server (with a web-based browser), a forum, a wiki, a mailing list manager, and a bug tracker, all integrated together. Setting that up takes a few minutes. How long would it take you to set all those things up on your own server?
The trade-off is that you give up control of the project hosting. But for most of us, that's a good deal, since we can spend time coding (or drinking beer) instead of dealing with the infrastructure.
The problem is, the SA government is not working on the AIDS problem. Their minister of health, for several years, was a woman who claimed that HIV doesn't cause AIDS, and that eating beets and garlic can protect you against it. You can't make this shit up. This minister is gone now, but the people who hired her are still in power.
probably they have some small print that allows them to withdraw any content they like.
It's their own damn site, of course they can withdraw anything they like. They don't need any fine print. But unlike some other mobile app retailers, they don't hold a monopoly on the platform, so people should be able to get the app elsewhere.
Accessing the camera or mic (for chat applications). Video filters. Audio filters. Rotation of elements.
The game that you mentioned was probably using Flash shared objects - it works on the same principle as browser cookies (access is strictly limited by originating site), but it's a lot more versatile (you can pass it any type of object, and it automatically gets serialized). So I guess this one counts as "easier/better".
Flash has always provided a richer design toolkit than even current HTML/CSS implementations
Bingo. Right now, there are some things that can only be done in Flash, and many others that Flash just does better. And I don't see this changing in the near future. Which is a shame - I wish there was a free and open alternative to Flash.
The navigation problem can also bite you on AJAX-heavy websites. And in both cases, there are ways to work around it, it just requires a little bit of effort by the developer.
While you're at it - it's netbrutality.com, not netbrutatlity.com.
Also, what exactly is the point of this story? Assuming its facts are true, all it proves is that the campaign wasn't sponsored by the telcos, but by a right-wing pro-business "think tank" that's probably funded by the telcos.
If it's done right, then various multiple social platforms can work together, instead of competing. That was supposed to be the goal of the OpenSocial API (which is implemented by OneSocialWeb, among others).
My take on it: they decided to do it because Google's doing it, and they don't want to get "left behind". Then they came up with a plausible-sounding business case for their scheme.
Sort of, but not quite. You said "marginalized", which I think is pretty extreme. The point that I was trying to make is that Flash might lose some of its huge market share, but at that point it would still be a major player.
No, most applications don't need this functionality. But for the ones that do, there's absolutely no substitute. If Flash was a new, emerging technology, then this wouldn't be enough - but in fact, it's well-established, stable, and ubiquitous. It might become less popular in the near future, but it ain't dying anytime soon.
And Flash doesn't just give automatic camera access to any website you visit - that would be ridiculous. The user has to explicitly allow access for every site.
And there are still some things that Flash can do but HTML5 can't. Access to the camera and mic, for instance. (Last I checked, JavaFX can't do that either.)
Yeah, I'd like to have a non-proprietary alternative to Flash too, but we're not quite there yet.
Slashdot Mirror
Any Custom Web App built by our company for either ourselves or our clients is 100% designed for IE.
Well, there's your problem right there.
This guy seems to have connected the dots.
I recently got to hang out with an older gentleman of the redneck persuasion. He was bitterly complaining about the harassment that he received from airport security the day before. Upon further questioning, it turned out that he wasn't actually upset about getting harassed himself, but about the fact that they didn't visit enough harassment on the 'motherfucker in a turban' who was in line in front of him.
Exactly how would a network attack result in the loss of "thousands of lives"?
If the network controls train traffic, or a power grid - yeah, I could easily imagine a major catastrophe.
Of course, none of that matters; since this bill was written by Lieberman, chances are very good that we don't need it.
All money is artificial.
It's about economies of scale, and the convenience that comes with it.
If you set up a project on Sourceforge, or Google Code, or Github, you get a VCS server (with a web-based browser), a forum, a wiki, a mailing list manager, and a bug tracker, all integrated together. Setting that up takes a few minutes. How long would it take you to set all those things up on your own server?
The trade-off is that you give up control of the project hosting. But for most of us, that's a good deal, since we can spend time coding (or drinking beer) instead of dealing with the infrastructure.
The problem is, the SA government is not working on the AIDS problem. Their minister of health, for several years, was a woman who claimed that HIV doesn't cause AIDS, and that eating beets and garlic can protect you against it. You can't make this shit up. This minister is gone now, but the people who hired her are still in power.
probably they have some small print that allows them to withdraw any content they like.
It's their own damn site, of course they can withdraw anything they like. They don't need any fine print. But unlike some other mobile app retailers, they don't hold a monopoly on the platform, so people should be able to get the app elsewhere.
Accessing the camera or mic (for chat applications). Video filters. Audio filters. Rotation of elements.
The game that you mentioned was probably using Flash shared objects - it works on the same principle as browser cookies (access is strictly limited by originating site), but it's a lot more versatile (you can pass it any type of object, and it automatically gets serialized). So I guess this one counts as "easier/better".
Flash has always provided a richer design toolkit than even current HTML/CSS implementations
Bingo. Right now, there are some things that can only be done in Flash, and many others that Flash just does better. And I don't see this changing in the near future. Which is a shame - I wish there was a free and open alternative to Flash.
The navigation problem can also bite you on AJAX-heavy websites. And in both cases, there are ways to work around it, it just requires a little bit of effort by the developer.
It's not entirely done in JavaScript - they have an off-screen Flash applet that handles the sound.
Works here on Firefox 3.6.3 (Mac). Maybe you're blocking the javascript?
Forcing them to drill?!
While you're at it - it's netbrutality.com, not netbrutatlity.com.
Also, what exactly is the point of this story? Assuming its facts are true, all it proves is that the campaign wasn't sponsored by the telcos, but by a right-wing pro-business "think tank" that's probably funded by the telcos.
If it's done right, then various multiple social platforms can work together, instead of competing. That was supposed to be the goal of the OpenSocial API (which is implemented by OneSocialWeb, among others).
From the Diaspora website:
"Our current implementations include GPG encryption, scraping Twitter and Flickr, [...]"
My take on it: they decided to do it because Google's doing it, and they don't want to get "left behind". Then they came up with a plausible-sounding business case for their scheme.
Sort of, but not quite. You said "marginalized", which I think is pretty extreme. The point that I was trying to make is that Flash might lose some of its huge market share, but at that point it would still be a major player.
No, most applications don't need this functionality. But for the ones that do, there's absolutely no substitute. If Flash was a new, emerging technology, then this wouldn't be enough - but in fact, it's well-established, stable, and ubiquitous. It might become less popular in the near future, but it ain't dying anytime soon.
Video chat. Ever heard of it?
And Flash doesn't just give automatic camera access to any website you visit - that would be ridiculous. The user has to explicitly allow access for every site.
And there are still some things that Flash can do but HTML5 can't. Access to the camera and mic, for instance. (Last I checked, JavaFX can't do that either.)
Yeah, I'd like to have a non-proprietary alternative to Flash too, but we're not quite there yet.
Oh, for those innocent years when we thought we could solve the world's problems by breakdancing.
Is it just coincidence that advanced cultures tend to go under within a couple of centuries after they invent plumbing?
Cultures go under all the time, with or without plumbing.
are we doomed?
Most certainly.
You would think that by this time, the discussion would have moved from "is global warming real?" to "what do we do about it?" No such luck.