I hope you go back and check every few minutes, to see if they're back up, and add them back to the list - otherwise, any spammer can get off the list just by removing the page for an hour or so.
I took a peek at streamload, and the downloads are all.exes, not web page bundles. Is it possible that this is some sort of binary app, and not a bundle consisting of html, css and javascript?
What I like about javascript is that I can just write it and test it and not have to worry about how it might look too different on different platforms.
CSS in a web app is a much easier way to control look-and-feel issues than Swing with java.
And, by using css and javascript to do all the positioning stuff, the actual "web page" that hosts the app is pretty simple.
Yes, there are things I have to be careful about (for example, Explorer doesn't support negative z-indexes, and the body.onresize event handler in firefox/moz is always off in its event reporting), but it's pertty neat to be able to just "write, refresh, debug" - without compiling.
When I was fooling around with java, I got so tired of the syntax that I ended up writing it in C and using a perl script and a bunch of header files to translate it into java. I guess it's an acquired taste:-)
Well, Opera has said they're going to support the XmlHttpRequest "real soon now", so it looks like it's going to be standard fare (So I can forget about using iframes to send and receive data - totally cool).
What I like about being able to hit the server for info is that I don't have to return a full page, so this makes for reduced server loads.
I refuse to do browser sniffing, so making web apps is a bit more challenging, but it really does make a difference to the end user - everything is "just there", instead of having to navigate page after page after page. And it still has the "gee whiz" factor. Also, you can write some web apps so they're completely self-contained, working with local data, and when you're finished save the data locally - here's how:
Store the data in one or more comment elements;
When the data is changed, update the contents of the comments;
Have the user save the page to disk when they're finished.
When they reload from disk, you just grab the data from the comments and continue where you left off. So the browser becomes the app host - no worrying about the underlying OS.
Think of it - if slashdot were a web app we'd probably see fewer 503 errors.
Not to be a spelling nazi, but I think you mis-spelled *universally disrepected bunch of microsoft-cock-gobblers*.
I had high hopes for Firefox, but if Gartner says they're a comer, it's time to start the "Firefox is dead" dirge [tt]. F$cking Gartner.
You can tell Microshaft is scared when the Word Fud Machine pumps out not one, but two anti-firefox stories the same day Google comes out with maps.google.com that works in both Exploder and Firefox.
Half the people out there don't need Windows for anything but games any more. Oh yeah, and to run bloated non-standard-compliant shit, like Microsnot's newest buzz-toy "binary xml".
So just how is Microsoft going to compete when Google OS is running as a distributed app on millions of computers? Oh, they won't be able to - right. And Gartnew won't have anything to write about, because it will all "just work".
You're part of the commonwealth... so come to Kanuckistan. [tt]Ca-na-da
I'm on an unlimited plan, and I've done 400 Gigabytes (that's bytes, not bits - 3.2 terabits) of transfer a month, and my bill is STILL under $70/month, all taxes in.
And that's for 6.5 Mb/s up, 1 mb/s down.
And it's ALWAYS fast. The system can easily handle 42Mb/s, they've capped it at 6.5, so if you want to subscribe to their digital pvr service, etc., there's more than enough bandwidth.
Just don't use the phone line - the phone company here (Bell) owns the largest porn distributor in Canada (ExpressVu) and doesn't like competition, so if you want to search for "educational materials",....
Now back on-topic:
Who gives a fuck what Gartner Group says? It's not a two-browser world. It's a "if I want I can make my own browser using readily-available components in a few days" world.
I could use java. Or I could start with firefox, or mozilla, or any other gecko-based browser. Hell, I could do it in Delphi.
If you really wanted, you could steal the #3 position from Opera by making a browser that specialized in sniffing out pr0n.
Cost of making your own porn browser: $0.00
Cost of distribution $0.00
Being able to smile when you say "my browser went down on me": Priceless
Huh? Most people living in Ottawa find it rather convenient that Montreal is so close - all-night boozing and sex only a convenient 1-hour drive away for the under-18 crowd.
If the eastern half of Halifax is missing, it's because you're about to be inundated by a tsunami of gigantic proportions, and be wiped off the map. Prepare yourself.
After all, they must be right. They took Ottawa off the main map, and Ottawa's been "way off the map" for a while...
Well, it's got Halifax, Quebec City, Montreal, Toronto, Winnipeg, Edmonton, Calgary, and Vancouver - and they NUKED OTTAWA (Canada's capital) from the main map - Yay Google!. Now why couldn't they have done that a few years ago?
Not a single province listed, but that's okay, 3/4 of the population lives in or around those 9 cities. As the feds have been saying for years, "fuck the provinces".
Copyright was originally designed to help promote creative works by providing a limited timeframe in which those works could be exploited, after which they were to pass into the public domain.
Corporate lobbyists have won several extensions to the copyright act, which ultimately inhibits creativity by keeping the "raw materials" from entering the public domain, where they can then be used to further advance the art, literature, etc.
Nobody should "own" an idea for their lifetime + N number of years, especially since even the idea of "intellectual property" is an artificial modern construct.
See the January 2005 issue of Analog for an interesting take on this whole mess.
I hope everyone else who's been following the thread realizes that your post is not flamebait.
Bittorrent is used for many uses, some of them copyright-infringing (trying to stay on-topic:-)
Various entities (several computer software vendors come to mind, and not just the usual suspects, either) have been pushing for changes at WIPO regarding copyright law
We can ignore the various mechanisms used to lobby for change at our own risk
Having said that, Paul Cellucci did more harm to US/Canada relations from the average Canadian's perspective, than anyone in recent memory.
If it happens again, we're going to let you KEEP Celine Dion!
Porn Whitelist was started a week ago in response to someone putting a bunch of people on something called the Profanity Blacklist/~Profanity%20Blacklist
The toughie as I see it is contributory infringement.
The issue is, for contributory infringement, whether it materially contributes to the infringement of another, with the knowledge of the infringement.
No easy argument there (though, with time... maybe:-).
Vicarious infringement is not so hard to get around...
As for vicarious infringement, whether the party had the right and ability to control the infringement, and directly profited from it.
The infringement is in the actual copying, to tangible media, and there is no mechanism that I know of to remotely disable someone's burner, so the "ability to control" is not there. The torrent site has no control over, and no knowledge of, whether the downloader makes 1, zero, or many copies. It could be argued that removing the torrent would also stop the copying, but that could be argued as being several steps removed from the actual act of copying. By the same logic, the sale of blank CDs should also be banned (and burners).
The "directly profited from it" is easy - there is no direct profit from hosting a torrent file - it actually costs you resources. Same argument as for use of copyright works covered by one of the exemptions provided in copyright law. Whether the school (or site) as a whole makes a profit is irrelevant to the question of whether any particular use qualifies as exempt.
In other news:
up here several of the major ISPs are common carriers (Rogers and Bell are both phone companies and ISPs), and they were taken to court to provide the names of file traders. Unfortunately for the music industry, Canadian law doesn't allow for the release of their subscriber's names.
You've clearly misunderstood the meaning of this said "levy". It's to compensate the industry for the losses incurred by existing piratism. It will in no way entitle you to further infringe on producers' copyright.
Of course, you could try your luck in the court but you would lose like people before you.
Canada deems P2P downloading legal Published: December 12, 2003, 2:20 PM PST By John Borland Staff Writer, CNET News.com
update Downloading copyrighted music from peer-to-peer networks is legal in Canada, although uploading files is not, Canadian copyright regulators said in a ruling released Friday.
In the same decision, the Copyright Board of Canada imposed a government fee of as much as $25 on iPod-like MP3 players, putting the devices in the same category as audio tapes and blank CDs. The money collected from levies on "recording mediums" goes into a fund to pay musicians and songwriters for revenues lost from consumers' personal copying. Manufacturers are responsible for paying the fees and often pass the cost on to consumers.
To quote you,
Or maybe you just don't like the way how the truth sounds.
Yes, it compensates them, but the thing you don't seem to want to understand is that THIS IS THE SYSTEM THE RECORDING INDUSTRY PROPOSED and agreed to. They just never thought blank CDs would go from $35 each to 30 cents each.
Congress will have a very hard time abridging this right for the 95% of the world who are not covered by US law.
For those who ARE covered by US law, again, congress will have a hard time, because it will be almost impossible to word a law in such a way that it has ONLY the desired effect.
Try to come up with some wording that forbids what you want to forbid, without having unintended consequences for, or negatively impacting, other technologies.
Congress has a hard enough time with simple issues (it's not like they READ the bills they pass, anyway). Can you imagine the mess they'll make out of any such law? Overly broad - it hurts too many vested interests and gets tossed out. Overly narrow - it gets worked around.
The only long-term solution for the **AAs is to get their act together and find ways to make money giving the people what they want, the way they want it. Their "natural monopoly" is dead.
Slashdot Mirror
BTW - love the concept.
At least ONE link is always different from any link on a legit bank site - the one url that they want to get you to click on.
So, back on-topic - What would people want in a web app designed for browsing porn?
What I like about javascript is that I can just write it and test it and not have to worry about how it might look too different on different platforms.
CSS in a web app is a much easier way to control look-and-feel issues than Swing with java.
And, by using css and javascript to do all the positioning stuff, the actual "web page" that hosts the app is pretty simple.
Yes, there are things I have to be careful about (for example, Explorer doesn't support negative z-indexes, and the body.onresize event handler in firefox/moz is always off in its event reporting), but it's pertty neat to be able to just "write, refresh, debug" - without compiling.
When I was fooling around with java, I got so tired of the syntax that I ended up writing it in C and using a perl script and a bunch of header files to translate it into java. I guess it's an acquired taste :-)
What I like about being able to hit the server for info is that I don't have to return a full page, so this makes for reduced server loads.
I refuse to do browser sniffing, so making web apps is a bit more challenging, but it really does make a difference to the end user - everything is "just there", instead of having to navigate page after page after page. And it still has the "gee whiz" factor. Also, you can write some web apps so they're completely self-contained, working with local data, and when you're finished save the data locally - here's how:
- Store the data in one or more comment elements;
- When the data is changed, update the contents of the comments;
- Have the user save the page to disk when they're finished.
When they reload from disk, you just grab the data from the comments and continue where you left off. So the browser becomes the app host - no worrying about the underlying OS.Think of it - if slashdot were a web app we'd probably see fewer 503 errors.
What, you didn't hear? BSD confirms NetCraft is dying [tt]. Or was it the gnaa? Somebody. Oh, yeah, Microsnot. Right.
About 40/60 for the xfers, though I expect the upload to increase in about 2 months ... stay tuned.
I had high hopes for Firefox, but if Gartner says they're a comer, it's time to start the "Firefox is dead" dirge [tt]. F$cking Gartner.
You can tell Microshaft is scared when the Word Fud Machine pumps out not one, but two anti-firefox stories the same day Google comes out with maps.google.com that works in both Exploder and Firefox.
Half the people out there don't need Windows for anything but games any more. Oh yeah, and to run bloated non-standard-compliant shit, like Microsnot's newest buzz-toy "binary xml".
So just how is Microsoft going to compete when Google OS is running as a distributed app on millions of computers? Oh, they won't be able to - right. And Gartnew won't have anything to write about, because it will all "just work".
Reply, then on-topic post at bottom ...
Now back on-topic:
Who gives a fuck what Gartner Group says? It's not a two-browser world. It's a "if I want I can make my own browser using readily-available components in a few days" world.
I could use java. Or I could start with firefox, or mozilla, or any other gecko-based browser. Hell, I could do it in Delphi.
If you really wanted, you could steal the #3 position from Opera by making a browser that specialized in sniffing out pr0n.
If the eastern half of Halifax is missing, it's because you're about to be inundated by a tsunami of gigantic proportions, and be wiped off the map. Prepare yourself.
After all, they must be right. They took Ottawa off the main map, and Ottawa's been "way off the map" for a while ...
Not a single province listed, but that's okay, 3/4 of the population lives in or around those 9 cities. As the feds have been saying for years, "fuck the provinces".
Corporate lobbyists have won several extensions to the copyright act, which ultimately inhibits creativity by keeping the "raw materials" from entering the public domain, where they can then be used to further advance the art, literature, etc.
Nobody should "own" an idea for their lifetime + N number of years, especially since even the idea of "intellectual property" is an artificial modern construct.
See the January 2005 issue of Analog for an interesting take on this whole mess.
Thank you (wish I knew who you were so I'd know who I'm thanking, but that's ok)
Nah, didn't you get the memo - we're being nice to ole Dubya this week :-)
- Bittorrent is used for many uses, some of them copyright-infringing (trying to stay on-topic
:-)
- Various entities (several computer software vendors come to mind, and not just the usual suspects, either) have been pushing for changes at WIPO regarding copyright law
- We can ignore the various mechanisms used to lobby for change at our own risk
Having said that, Paul Cellucci did more harm to US/Canada relations from the average Canadian's perspective, than anyone in recent memory.If it happens again, we're going to let you KEEP Celine Dion!
So, I guess the only solution is
- either to come up with a grokster-style torrent (or an anonytorrent)
- or figure out a way so that all the stakeholders in copyrighted material benefit from the easy distribution model of bittorrent-like services
Actually, maybe implementing (1) will help put pressure to figure out how to get to (2).It's a nasty job, but somebody's got to do it :-)
The toughie as I see it is contributory infringement.
No easy argument there (though, with timeVicarious infringement is not so hard to get around ...
The infringement is in the actual copying, to tangible media, and there is no mechanism that I know of to remotely disable someone's burner, so the "ability to control" is not there. The torrent site has no control over, and no knowledge of, whether the downloader makes 1, zero, or many copies. It could be argued that removing the torrent would also stop the copying, but that could be argued as being several steps removed from the actual act of copying. By the same logic, the sale of blank CDs should also be banned (and burners).The "directly profited from it" is easy - there is no direct profit from hosting a torrent file - it actually costs you resources. Same argument as for use of copyright works covered by one of the exemptions provided in copyright law. Whether the school (or site) as a whole makes a profit is irrelevant to the question of whether any particular use qualifies as exempt.
In other news: up here several of the major ISPs are common carriers (Rogers and Bell are both phone companies and ISPs), and they were taken to court to provide the names of file traders. Unfortunately for the music industry, Canadian law doesn't allow for the release of their subscriber's names.
If the person who posted the question wanted to measure and quantify traffic in, for example, their own network, this would be the way to do it.
Stupid ACs.
Or, for those too lazy to click:
To quote you,Yes, it compensates them, but the thing you don't seem to want to understand is that THIS IS THE SYSTEM THE RECORDING INDUSTRY PROPOSED and agreed to. They just never thought blank CDs would go from $35 each to 30 cents each.-
Congress will have a very hard time abridging this right for the 95% of the world who are not covered by US law.
- For those who ARE covered by US law, again, congress will have a hard time, because it will be almost impossible to word a law in such a way that it has ONLY the desired effect.
Try to come up with some wording that forbids what you want to forbid, without having unintended consequences for, or negatively impacting, other technologies.Congress has a hard enough time with simple issues (it's not like they READ the bills they pass, anyway). Can you imagine the mess they'll make out of any such law? Overly broad - it hurts too many vested interests and gets tossed out. Overly narrow - it gets worked around.
The only long-term solution for the **AAs is to get their act together and find ways to make money giving the people what they want, the way they want it. Their "natural monopoly" is dead.