Why don't they "just" write a secure Java virtual machine? I guess they can even run javascript inside the same VM, so a unified approach.
And Google recently developed an efficient sandbox called NaCl, so why not follow them? They could even run Java inside NaCl to add another layer of security. Hell, they could even run the complete browser inside NaCl, so Firefox would run on Chrome too:)
Can't read the article (server slashdotted?), but, since they have the data-center anyway, I suggest they start a "free" social network, a "free" web-based email service, and a "free" search engine.
Let's say I hate intellectual property, so I want to opt-in to a IP-free society. But, I'm afraid new biotech equipment (3d-printing of viruses) could destroy the world, so I would like to not opt-in to a 3d-printing-everything society. How is having one opt-in society going to help me?!?
The power production density of the core [of the Sun] overall is similar to the metabolic production density of a reptile. ... At 19% of the solar radius, near the edge of the core, temperatures are about 10 million kelvin and fusion power density is 6.9 watts/m3
If even fusion inside the Sun does not produce any useful power output per volume, how are they going to get useful power outputs here on earth?
In a deterministic universe, if the universe starts with X amount of information, then the amount of information can only drop I suppose. Because determinism implies that a computation is going on, and computations can only destroy information, not create it. For example, performing x^2 destroys information, because we lose information about the sign of x. But performing 2*x keeps information, because we can always compute x back from 2*x.
So, I suppose that "information" can ONLY be created from the non-deterministic part of the unfolding of the universe. When there are at some point N non-deterministic choices, then this accounts for log2 N bits of information.
You can still think this ruling against Google is silly, but we should be precise on distinctions like that.
You better invent some catchy phrases to describe both types of scanning, otherwise I'm afraid the whole distinction will get lost on the people who are writing the laws in question.
Is Native Client open? Is it a standard? Native Client is completely open: the executable format is open and the source code is open. Right now the Native Client project is in its early stages, so it's premature to consider Native Client for standardization.
You think that NaCl might lock you in to some proprietary standard, but the complete opposite is true: if you want, you can build your own version of HTML and CSS in NaCl, or build your own programming language. Hell, you can build a browser in NaCl.
You are looking too much from a technical viewpoint.
If HTML provides good standards for monetization, (e.g., micropayments), and browser vendors follow them, then I see hope for HTML.
On the other hand, big players may work against that. For example, Google, Facebook and Twitter have no interest in micropayments, as they depend too much on an ad-based world. Apple is too much into closed technologies.
Perhaps Amazon could trigger a world of web-payments, but they really need the browser vendors on their side then.
But, as I was trying to say, the same can happen on a regular network. When sending from A to B through X, and X dies, the path may have to go through Y, where Y is on a completely different part of the network. So what makes this phone-case so special?
So, you are saying that when you have a stable connection from A to B through X, and X goes dead, your connection drops even though there is another route through Y?
In that case, I'd say TCP contains some serious design error.
Slashdot Mirror
I give it five years, maybe six, and the Internet will be completely walled off by a McDonalds logo.
My bets are going to a McBook logo...
Indeed! And to hackers, machine language or byte code is equivalent to source anyway...
Why don't they "just" write a secure Java virtual machine? I guess they can even run javascript inside the same VM, so a unified approach.
And Google recently developed an efficient sandbox called NaCl, so why not follow them? They could even run Java inside NaCl to add another layer of security. Hell, they could even run the complete browser inside NaCl, so Firefox would run on Chrome too :)
Can't read the article (server slashdotted?), but, since they have the data-center anyway, I suggest they start a "free" social network, a "free" web-based email service, and a "free" search engine.
There only needs to be one society.
I'm not sure you used the word "needs" correctly.
Let's say I hate intellectual property, so I want to opt-in to a IP-free society. But, I'm afraid new biotech equipment (3d-printing of viruses) could destroy the world, so I would like to not opt-in to a 3d-printing-everything society. How is having one opt-in society going to help me?!?
So let's say there are N choices you can "opt-in" for. Does this mean there will be 2^N societies to choose from?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Idd32nyf1pc
From wikipedia:
The power production density of the core [of the Sun] overall is similar to the metabolic production density of a reptile.
...
At 19% of the solar radius, near the edge of the core, temperatures are about 10 million kelvin and fusion power density is 6.9 watts/m3
If even fusion inside the Sun does not produce any useful power output per volume, how are they going to get useful power outputs here on earth?
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_core
Sigh. I want to pay just for what I use, just like in the old days. To hell with these complicated terms and conditions which are only fair to google.
You're forgetting that if they build a Linux version for a game, they automatically get Windows and Mac versions.
How?
Well, they can just distribute the game on a CD or USB drive that boots Linux and starts the game.
And what is this thing they call "information"?
In a deterministic universe, if the universe starts with X amount of information, then the amount of information can only drop I suppose. Because determinism implies that a computation is going on, and computations can only destroy information, not create it. For example, performing x^2 destroys information, because we lose information about the sign of x. But performing 2*x keeps information, because we can always compute x back from 2*x.
So, I suppose that "information" can ONLY be created from the non-deterministic part of the unfolding of the universe. When there are at some point N non-deterministic choices, then this accounts for log2 N bits of information.
Is this the correct view?
If only we could buy our own patent officers.
And lobbyists.
There might be good reasons why the connection would go through London, but twice, and then come back?
Perhaps the packet forgot its toothbrush?
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity.
He's the real deal like licorice though.
Foot callus tastes like licorice?
You can still think this ruling against Google is silly, but we should be precise on distinctions like that.
You better invent some catchy phrases to describe both types of scanning, otherwise I'm afraid the whole distinction will get lost on the people who are writing the laws in question.
From the NaCl FAQ:
Is Native Client open? Is it a standard?
Native Client is completely open: the executable format is open and the source code is open. Right now the Native Client project is in its early stages, so it's premature to consider Native Client for standardization.
You think that NaCl might lock you in to some proprietary standard, but the complete opposite is true: if you want, you can build your own version of HTML and CSS in NaCl, or build your own programming language. Hell, you can build a browser in NaCl.
http://xkcd.com/927/
Why does gravity have the strength it has.
Nah, it's the modules which the NSA crams in that is making the whole thing slow.
Article doesn't say much about how the new ID is supposed to work.
They closely cooperate with the NSA. It's all give and take.
You are looking too much from a technical viewpoint.
If HTML provides good standards for monetization, (e.g., micropayments), and browser vendors follow them, then I see hope for HTML.
On the other hand, big players may work against that. For example, Google, Facebook and Twitter have no interest in micropayments, as they depend too much on an ad-based world. Apple is too much into closed technologies.
Perhaps Amazon could trigger a world of web-payments, but they really need the browser vendors on their side then.
Why do you think processor speeds got stuck at about 3.5 GHz?
Yes, because there's some NSA real estate on your cpu.
Because you can't code emergent behavior doesn't mean nobody else can.
But, as I was trying to say, the same can happen on a regular network.
When sending from A to B through X, and X dies, the path may have to go through Y, where Y is on a completely different part of the network.
So what makes this phone-case so special?
So, you are saying that when you have a stable connection from A to B through X, and X goes dead, your connection drops even though there is another route through Y?
In that case, I'd say TCP contains some serious design error.