...lets get together and crowd-poll Google to commercialize this app so its as easy as taking a picture with our smartphone!
Commercialise? Commercialise?!?
How about we get together and crowd-poll Google to release it under a FOSS license so we can take it and make it do whatever the fuck we want it to, and then share it with a couple million of our closest friends?
I'd ask the anonymous submitter to hand in their geek card, but I can't bring myself to believe they ever actually had one....
I'm responsible for all KINDS of different searches from over 20 IP's...
Oops, we stand corrected: Make that 999,999,981 unique visitors.
Of course, we kind of fudged the underage we got from the countless Internet cafés worldwide, then jiggled things a bit to cope with laptops and tablets in Starbucks and airports... oh - we did catch that two month period when you were leeching off your neighbour's wifi. And we tried to tell the difference between the times when you accessed the web via your Kindle, your XBox and your Android phone, because you know, at this level of accuracy, mere statistical analysis isn't going to cut it....
So... thanks a bunch for clearing that up. Our numbers just wouldn't be the same without the benefit of your little anecdote....
Books were quite expensive one hundred years ago and is was fashionable to write in only the most dense prose which required quite an education to understand.
You have anywhere from 10's to 100's of thousands of relationships between documents, and you somehow think a good RDBMS wouldn't be of help? You may be an amazing site admin, but you're not much of a developer.
And clearly you've not worked a lot with amorphous data sets. The 'relationships' between documents are not formalised or structured in a way that makes storage in an RDBMS useful at all.
I've written and managed a few database-driven sites in my time, but my area of specialisation is unstructured corpuses that require lots of pattern recognition and natural language processing. Relational databases, in this context, are generally of limited usefulness. This is more Google-style stuff than anything else.
I will say, though, that NoSQL looks pretty cool. I'm going to be integrating CouchDB into parts of our system before the year is out.
... And since you mentioned it, I'm actually a better developer than I am a site admin. 8^)
As the number of documents grows, the potential number of links in all other documents grows exponentially
No it doesn't.
Yes, it does. You're assuming one link per document, aren't you? I'm talking about multiple links within the body of the document, which could point to one or all of the others, and/or to an arbitrary number of outside documents as well.
Nice EMACS plug, but it's not what the OP wants. The OP is maintaining "a trivial site with a couple of pages/templates".
Did everyone miss the fact that I said EMACS or VI?
No, my point stands. Editing HTML/CSS and doing some minor scripting is easier in a decent *nix environment than attempting the same thing in any single IDE.
I've been wrangling websites since the very first graphical browsers were available, and believe me, if there really were a silver-bullet-IDE that allowed me to do everything in one place, I'd be using it.
What, then, does your world view make of my day-to-day pattern of using Vim for most html/css/js, netbeans for all my java, and the command line to tie it all together?
I'd say welcome to the club. (I did say EMACS/vi above....) 8^)
The point I was trying to make is that expecting to find a silver-bullet-style IDE that will magically do everything exactly how you want is a pipe dream, especially where HTML/CSS generation is concerned. The *nix tool-chain approach (such as yours), on the other hand, actually does allow you to do more or less exactly what you need to do. The fact that you've chosen a hybrid environment doesn't really take away from this fundamental point.
It may be that I can write some of that fancy new server side code to generate those 100,000+ files, then cache them to get the same performance.;)
I doubt it, actually. I won't bore you with the detailed rationale for using static files, but you can trust me when I say it's compelling. One particular reason is that these documents are all deeply cross-referenced and the citations need to be managed very carefully. As the number of documents grows, the potential number of links in all other documents grows exponentially. The only way to be sure that all the references are complete, up to date and correct is to reprocess the entire collection periodically.
There's much more to it than this, but rest assured, every single person who has dealt with this system has looked at server-side, on-demand generation and decided against it.
... But yes, we do have a proper build system in place, consisting of a tool chain of simple, powerful utilities bound together with a bunch of scripted glue code. all maintained in EMACS and/or VI on Linux machines - which was my original point. 8^)
Before someone comes in putting down all the IDE's and tools for web designing and suggests Notepad, let me just say this - no, notepad is not replacement for a good, solid IDE.
Notepad is not only a useless HTML editor, it's a useless text editor. Use a real one and you'll see the virtue of this argument.
EMACS or vi on a decent Unix/linux workstation is your IDE. I challenge any web developer to keep up with me in site design and updating. You might be able to stay with me on a trivial site with a couple of pages/templates, but I guarantee you that as soon as you start working on anything non-trivial (like the 100,000+ static documents I currently administer), a real text editor and the basic set of *nix utilities will leave any IDE looking weak and impoverished.
Why is Ubuntu so prone to horrible choices like this?
The answer's pretty simple: They've stopped listening.
Ubuntu is slipping out of control. Canonical have stopped listening and – more importantly – working with the community. The number of defects is growing, but Canonical’s response is to make it harder for mere mortals to submit bugs. They seem to think that strong guidance is needed for their product to grow in new and interesting ways. Fair enough, but they’re confusing leadership with control. They’re simply imposing their views because they don’t value the discussion. They’re treating criticism as opposition and shutting themselves off from valid feedback.
Worse, they simply don’t have the number of skilled developers they need to achieve their goals. When I look at the bug queues on some packages, I shudder in sympathy with the poor souls who are expected to wrangle them. Canonical is clearly embarked on an impossible task, but nobody’s either got the guts or the vision to spell this out to Shuttleworth and co.
Having a server doing redirects and nothing else would still accomplish the same ends. Google doesn't want to put servers with content there. A redirection server would technically be operating www.google.kz within their borders AND it would avoid the unreasonable demands.
Although I'm not sure changing the DNS entry really qualifies as operating but governments will see it how they want.
I suspect you've got it exactly backwards. It seems to me that Google above all does not want to host any infrastructure (even a redirection server) in the nation of Kazakhstan because of the potential for interference.
The redirects that they speak of would likely be from google.com to google.com (localised in Kazakh -or Russian, or whatever- language) when a GEOIP lookup determines that the query is originating from within Kazakhstan. This does complicate the issue because it means they can't use their normal mechanism to segregate search result data, but it makes it a trifling bit harder for the powers-that-be in Kazakhstan to censor^H^H^H^H^H^Hglorify the Motherland via Google's search service.
Ahhh Slashdot, where bashing Microsoft for no good reason is always a good way to get modded up.
It's not that we have no reason to do so; it's that there are so many that we get tired of reciting them. 8^)
This time, the development is newsworthy because we also get to beat up on Google and Yahoo! at the same time. The reasons may be found in the article, which, despite its angry, polemical tone, is pretty much on the money.
Google, Microsoft et alia are basically saying, 'Speak my language on the web - win a prize!' That's all well and good, right up until you want to encapsulate your data in such a way that it expresses something they don't recognise, or don't support, or don't like. Obvious examples would be erotica and various alternative or subversive artistic media, political expression and fringe culture[*].
RDFa is capable of performing exactly the same tasks as microdata, but it's open and extensible. This means that communities/cultures would be able to derive their own semantic ontologies using the same grammar and structure as the big guys, making it easier for groups big and small to make use of the data.
---------------
[*] This potentially includes entire nations (such as the tiny South Pacific country I live in).
I get so sick of hearing people say that the internet can't be censored (usually with some "The internet is *designed* to route around any censorship" crap).
The Internet is designed to route around censorship. It's the physical networks that have choke points.
And no. this is not a distinction without a difference. As long as there are multiple routes to a destination, TCP/IP manages very well indeed, and allows the opportunity for all kinds of hard-to-track activity. But the vast majority of physical networks are built in the traditional telco format: Small pipes aggregating to big ones that pass through a single gateway, which is typically where the telco installs its toll booth and the government its censor. This topology is really the opposite of an end-to-end network, which is typically how we define the Internet.
The Internet is useful for two important things during an insurrection: To win the sympathy of the outside world, and to coordinate action. Ad hoc mesh networks would address the latter moderately well[*] (in urban areas) and smuggling high density media would work for the former. There is hope for the Internet yet, but it's not going to be realised as long as we leave it in the hands of telcos and governments.
--------------
[*] Of course, I'm not talking about typical North American consumer Internet. I'm talking about having any ability to communicate at all in the face of overwhelming censorship..
contract some penetration tester like the one from offensivesecurity
Why pay?
Just buy a domain called iheartsony.com (or similar), load it up with insults against Vladimir Putin and every member of the Chinese politburo and top it off with gay porn images with the head of the king of Thailand 'shopped onto the bodies.
If your server is still standing after a week, it's secure....
(NOTE: This does not guarantee that you will still be standing at the end of the week.)
B.) Phenomenally intelligent people can still be self-taught, on their own, through free stuff like khanacademy, or just buying and reading textbooks on their own. I'm not that smart, or dedicated, but I see it as an option.
I have two assistants where I work (a developing country): One of them is a university graduate who will be leaving us shortly to do a Masters at UBC in Canada. She's naturally talented, speaks fluent English and is bound to be among the elite in this nation. The second left school after the tenth grade, worked as a gardener and was lucky enough to find an employer who was impressed by his intelligence and work ethic. They paid for him to attend a one-year certificate in computer technology. We too were impressed by the man, in spite of his lack of qualification and took him on at a pitifully low wage as a trainee. He's now my designated heir.
His girlfriend followed a similar path. She worked 11 years as an admin assistant before the Telecommunications Regulator recognised her potential and began training her to effectively take over operations. I just finished writing a national Internet policy with her assistance.
Both of these people had to work extremely hard to compensate for their lack of opportunity, but they are demonstrably talented, intelligent and dedicated. The first, who was given opportunities not available to most of the population, is not going to face the challenges that they did, and I worry that this will shape her character differently. As a result, I tend to be more demanding of her, less patient with mistakes, but I put the bulk of the birden of responsibility on her relatively untrained counterpart, because he's the one I have more faith in to stick with a task and see it to completion.
I confess I'm sympathetic to the untrained and inexperienced, because I have no formal education in my field (I studied Theatre and English Literature in university), but time and again I've seen that real intelligence and hard work are the only things of value in life. Privilege (such as a university degree from a prominent school) undoubtedly shortens the time and effort required to advance, and provides an invaluable set of skills. So I agree with the fundamental correlation between education and opportunity. But based on my own experience and those around me, I can say with confidence that it's not required if you possess the will to learn and some dedication to your chosen field.
This place is full of Quantum; it's everywhere you look It's in the halls of Physicists, and pages of a book. "There has to be a fallacy!" the comment summarised, And if we care to challenge that, we aren't very wise?
But 'consciousness is quantum' is facile, don't you think?
One hell of a non sequitur; he's right to raise a stink.
Without supporting data, the statement is absurd,
I'm with OP, this is dopey - at best the logic's blurred!
That makes sense if you know the stars initial spin. I'm curious how that is known.
Well, in the case of Madonna, we were able to look at her early videos. Based on this, we calculated her age as 1.1873 x 10^16 years.
[insert Big Bang joke here]
Re:Related lawsuit filed against second U.S. corp.
on
Falun Gong Sues Cisco
·
· Score: 0
The Chinese group, through further assistance of the Washington, D.C.-based Human Rights Law Foundation, has filed a multi-billion dollar US lawsuit against Ford Motor Corporation. They have documented the use of numerous models of Ford vehicles by Chinese government officers in the arrest of members of the religious group, leading to their false imprisonment, torture, and wrongful death.
Oh, for crying out loud, moderators! Quit punishing people you disagree with through the mod system. If you had any balls^H^H^H^Heven half an intellect you'd be able to demolish this argument in a sentence.
Slashdot Mirror
...lets get together and crowd-poll Google to commercialize this app so its as easy as taking a picture with our smartphone!
Commercialise? Commercialise?!?
How about we get together and crowd-poll Google to release it under a FOSS license so we can take it and make it do whatever the fuck we want it to, and then share it with a couple million of our closest friends?
I'd ask the anonymous submitter to hand in their geek card, but I can't bring myself to believe they ever actually had one....
That is all.
WALLOWITZ: It was him or me, ma! HIM OR ME!!!
I'm responsible for all KINDS of different searches from over 20 IP's...
Oops, we stand corrected: Make that 999,999,981 unique visitors.
Of course, we kind of fudged the underage we got from the countless Internet cafés worldwide, then jiggled things a bit to cope with laptops and tablets in Starbucks and airports... oh - we did catch that two month period when you were leeching off your neighbour's wifi. And we tried to tell the difference between the times when you accessed the web via your Kindle, your XBox and your Android phone, because you know, at this level of accuracy, mere statistical analysis isn't going to cut it....
So... thanks a bunch for clearing that up. Our numbers just wouldn't be the same without the benefit of your little anecdote....
Oh, wait - yes they would.
sincerely,
ComScore
Books were quite expensive one hundred years ago and is was fashionable to write in only the most dense prose which required quite an education to understand.
Er, no.
O_____>-|o _____O
Two things:
You have anywhere from 10's to 100's of thousands of relationships between documents, and you somehow think a good RDBMS wouldn't be of help? You may be an amazing site admin, but you're not much of a developer.
And clearly you've not worked a lot with amorphous data sets. The 'relationships' between documents are not formalised or structured in a way that makes storage in an RDBMS useful at all.
I've written and managed a few database-driven sites in my time, but my area of specialisation is unstructured corpuses that require lots of pattern recognition and natural language processing. Relational databases, in this context, are generally of limited usefulness. This is more Google-style stuff than anything else.
I will say, though, that NoSQL looks pretty cool. I'm going to be integrating CouchDB into parts of our system before the year is out.
... And since you mentioned it, I'm actually a better developer than I am a site admin. 8^)
No it doesn't.
Yes, it does. You're assuming one link per document, aren't you? I'm talking about multiple links within the body of the document, which could point to one or all of the others, and/or to an arbitrary number of outside documents as well.
Nice EMACS plug, but it's not what the OP wants. The OP is maintaining "a trivial site with a couple of pages/templates".
Did everyone miss the fact that I said EMACS or VI?
No, my point stands. Editing HTML/CSS and doing some minor scripting is easier in a decent *nix environment than attempting the same thing in any single IDE.
I've been wrangling websites since the very first graphical browsers were available, and believe me, if there really were a silver-bullet-IDE that allowed me to do everything in one place, I'd be using it.
What, then, does your world view make of my day-to-day pattern of using Vim for most html/css/js, netbeans for all my java, and the command line to tie it all together?
I'd say welcome to the club. (I did say EMACS/vi above....) 8^)
The point I was trying to make is that expecting to find a silver-bullet-style IDE that will magically do everything exactly how you want is a pipe dream, especially where HTML/CSS generation is concerned. The *nix tool-chain approach (such as yours), on the other hand, actually does allow you to do more or less exactly what you need to do. The fact that you've chosen a hybrid environment doesn't really take away from this fundamental point.
It may be that I can write some of that fancy new server side code to generate those 100,000+ files, then cache them to get the same performance. ;)
I doubt it, actually. I won't bore you with the detailed rationale for using static files, but you can trust me when I say it's compelling. One particular reason is that these documents are all deeply cross-referenced and the citations need to be managed very carefully. As the number of documents grows, the potential number of links in all other documents grows exponentially. The only way to be sure that all the references are complete, up to date and correct is to reprocess the entire collection periodically.
There's much more to it than this, but rest assured, every single person who has dealt with this system has looked at server-side, on-demand generation and decided against it.
... But yes, we do have a proper build system in place, consisting of a tool chain of simple, powerful utilities bound together with a bunch of scripted glue code. all maintained in EMACS and/or VI on Linux machines - which was my original point. 8^)
Before someone comes in putting down all the IDE's and tools for web designing and suggests Notepad, let me just say this - no, notepad is not replacement for a good, solid IDE.
Notepad is not only a useless HTML editor, it's a useless text editor. Use a real one and you'll see the virtue of this argument.
EMACS or vi on a decent Unix/linux workstation is your IDE. I challenge any web developer to keep up with me in site design and updating. You might be able to stay with me on a trivial site with a couple of pages/templates, but I guarantee you that as soon as you start working on anything non-trivial (like the 100,000+ static documents I currently administer), a real text editor and the basic set of *nix utilities will leave any IDE looking weak and impoverished.
Why is Ubuntu so prone to horrible choices like this?
The answer's pretty simple: They've stopped listening.
Ubuntu is slipping out of control. Canonical have stopped listening and – more importantly – working with the community. The number of defects is growing, but Canonical’s response is to make it harder for mere mortals to submit bugs. They seem to think that strong guidance is needed for their product to grow in new and interesting ways. Fair enough, but they’re confusing leadership with control. They’re simply imposing their views because they don’t value the discussion. They’re treating criticism as opposition and shutting themselves off from valid feedback.
Worse, they simply don’t have the number of skilled developers they need to achieve their goals. When I look at the bug queues on some packages, I shudder in sympathy with the poor souls who are expected to wrangle them. Canonical is clearly embarked on an impossible task, but nobody’s either got the guts or the vision to spell this out to Shuttleworth and co.
(This is excerpted from a slightly longer piece I wrote after 11.04 was released.)
If you post copyrighted material on YouTube, then the terrorists win. QED.
That's al QED to you, mister.
Having a server doing redirects and nothing else would still accomplish the same ends. Google doesn't want to put servers with content there. A redirection server would technically be operating www.google.kz within their borders AND it would avoid the unreasonable demands.
Although I'm not sure changing the DNS entry really qualifies as operating but governments will see it how they want.
I suspect you've got it exactly backwards. It seems to me that Google above all does not want to host any infrastructure (even a redirection server) in the nation of Kazakhstan because of the potential for interference.
The redirects that they speak of would likely be from google.com to google.com (localised in Kazakh -or Russian, or whatever- language) when a GEOIP lookup determines that the query is originating from within Kazakhstan. This does complicate the issue because it means they can't use their normal mechanism to segregate search result data, but it makes it a trifling bit harder for the powers-that-be in Kazakhstan to censor^H^H^H^H^H^Hglorify the Motherland via Google's search service.
It didn't take long to start discussing the definition of a geek.
And that is a pretty good place to start defining geek nature.
Rather than being anti-intellectual, geek nature is unconventional, in the sense that a typical geek:
Ahhh Slashdot, where bashing Microsoft for no good reason is always a good way to get modded up.
It's not that we have no reason to do so; it's that there are so many that we get tired of reciting them. 8^)
This time, the development is newsworthy because we also get to beat up on Google and Yahoo! at the same time. The reasons may be found in the article, which, despite its angry, polemical tone, is pretty much on the money.
Google, Microsoft et alia are basically saying, 'Speak my language on the web - win a prize!' That's all well and good, right up until you want to encapsulate your data in such a way that it expresses something they don't recognise, or don't support, or don't like. Obvious examples would be erotica and various alternative or subversive artistic media, political expression and fringe culture[*].
RDFa is capable of performing exactly the same tasks as microdata, but it's open and extensible. This means that communities/cultures would be able to derive their own semantic ontologies using the same grammar and structure as the big guys, making it easier for groups big and small to make use of the data.
---------------
[*] This potentially includes entire nations (such as the tiny South Pacific country I live in).
I get so sick of hearing people say that the internet can't be censored (usually with some "The internet is *designed* to route around any censorship" crap).
The Internet is designed to route around censorship. It's the physical networks that have choke points.
And no. this is not a distinction without a difference. As long as there are multiple routes to a destination, TCP/IP manages very well indeed, and allows the opportunity for all kinds of hard-to-track activity. But the vast majority of physical networks are built in the traditional telco format: Small pipes aggregating to big ones that pass through a single gateway, which is typically where the telco installs its toll booth and the government its censor. This topology is really the opposite of an end-to-end network, which is typically how we define the Internet.
The Internet is useful for two important things during an insurrection: To win the sympathy of the outside world, and to coordinate action. Ad hoc mesh networks would address the latter moderately well[*] (in urban areas) and smuggling high density media would work for the former. There is hope for the Internet yet, but it's not going to be realised as long as we leave it in the hands of telcos and governments.
--------------
[*] Of course, I'm not talking about typical North American consumer Internet. I'm talking about having any ability to communicate at all in the face of overwhelming censorship..
contract some penetration tester like the one from offensivesecurity
Why pay?
Just buy a domain called iheartsony.com (or similar), load it up with insults against Vladimir Putin and every member of the Chinese politburo and top it off with gay porn images with the head of the king of Thailand 'shopped onto the bodies.
If your server is still standing after a week, it's secure....
(NOTE: This does not guarantee that you will still be standing at the end of the week.)
Obligatory non-goatse links with useful info:
Man, you must be really new here!
The revenues are sufficient enough . . .
You do realize that 'sufficient' means 'enough', yes?
Apparently not sufficiently enough, evidently.
it's jerks from here to infinity.
That's not the meme.
It's jerks all the way down.
QED
(Also: QED )
B.) Phenomenally intelligent people can still be self-taught, on their own, through free stuff like khanacademy, or just buying and reading textbooks on their own. I'm not that smart, or dedicated, but I see it as an option.
I have two assistants where I work (a developing country): One of them is a university graduate who will be leaving us shortly to do a Masters at UBC in Canada. She's naturally talented, speaks fluent English and is bound to be among the elite in this nation. The second left school after the tenth grade, worked as a gardener and was lucky enough to find an employer who was impressed by his intelligence and work ethic. They paid for him to attend a one-year certificate in computer technology. We too were impressed by the man, in spite of his lack of qualification and took him on at a pitifully low wage as a trainee. He's now my designated heir.
His girlfriend followed a similar path. She worked 11 years as an admin assistant before the Telecommunications Regulator recognised her potential and began training her to effectively take over operations. I just finished writing a national Internet policy with her assistance.
Both of these people had to work extremely hard to compensate for their lack of opportunity, but they are demonstrably talented, intelligent and dedicated. The first, who was given opportunities not available to most of the population, is not going to face the challenges that they did, and I worry that this will shape her character differently. As a result, I tend to be more demanding of her, less patient with mistakes, but I put the bulk of the birden of responsibility on her relatively untrained counterpart, because he's the one I have more faith in to stick with a task and see it to completion.
I confess I'm sympathetic to the untrained and inexperienced, because I have no formal education in my field (I studied Theatre and English Literature in university), but time and again I've seen that real intelligence and hard work are the only things of value in life. Privilege (such as a university degree from a prominent school) undoubtedly shortens the time and effort required to advance, and provides an invaluable set of skills. So I agree with the fundamental correlation between education and opportunity. But based on my own experience and those around me, I can say with confidence that it's not required if you possess the will to learn and some dedication to your chosen field.
This place is full of Quantum; it's everywhere you look
It's in the halls of Physicists, and pages of a book.
"There has to be a fallacy!" the comment summarised,
And if we care to challenge that, we aren't very wise?
But 'consciousness is quantum' is facile, don't you think?
One hell of a non sequitur; he's right to raise a stink.
Without supporting data, the statement is absurd,
I'm with OP, this is dopey - at best the logic's blurred!
That makes sense if you know the stars initial spin. I'm curious how that is known.
Well, in the case of Madonna, we were able to look at her early videos. Based on this, we calculated her age as 1.1873 x 10^16 years.
[insert Big Bang joke here]
The Chinese group, through further assistance of the Washington, D.C.-based Human Rights Law Foundation, has filed a multi-billion dollar US lawsuit against Ford Motor Corporation. They have documented the use of numerous models of Ford vehicles by Chinese government officers in the arrest of members of the religious group, leading to their false imprisonment, torture, and wrongful death.
Oh, for crying out loud, moderators! Quit punishing people you disagree with through the mod system. If you had any balls^H^H^H^Heven half an intellect you'd be able to demolish this argument in a sentence.
Down-modding is intellectual cowardice.