One company just directs ads to you. They serve the ads directly and they don't hand over your private data.
The other company routinely changes privacy policies every couple months so you don't know they're exposing and selling your data after you repeatedly told them you don't want them doing that.
Or he calmly went back to his near-utopian Google campus and said, "I feel bad for Facebook. They have no idea what we have up our sleeve." And then he spent the rest of the day playing ping pong.
My choices are being frisked and groped, or standing in a scanner. Both are unreasonable invasions of my privacy. Taking one over the other isn't really helping the situation.
The solution is to raise awareness until the government is willing to change, which is why I posted links to the Opt Out site on my Twitter and Facebook.
I think part of the reason that Linus is more accepting of this change rather than replacing the entire scheduler (like Con Kolivas pushed for) is that Linus likes small, neat patches. And I think Linus gets offended when someone wants to rip out large sections of the kernel and replace them.
I often wonder how much old, legacy code there is in the kernel that is just overlooked. Anytime you carry code for that many years, you're bound to have some legacy systems that can due to be replaced.
Kernel benchmarks are always a point of contention. But interbench and all the standard benchmarks did show a marked improvement with the CK patchset and the Staircase scheduler.
If Linus didn't really believe it was an improvement, then why did he eventually call on Ingo to write a very similar scheduler?
Linus didn't want to admit he was a jerk who made a flippant personal decision rather than focusing on the best code.
Occassionally, yes. But usually when Linus flames someone on the LKML he is entertaining, and is right. This was an instance where Linus just seemed to be a dick for no reason.
Con Kolivas worked on his staircase scheduler and various performance patches for years. They were routinely demonstrated to be a major improvement. Linus kept saying he was concerned the tradeoff of desktop performance would come in other environments, even though that wasn't true.
Since benchmark after benchmark showed staircase was vastly superior to what was in mainline, Linus then went to go after the guy rather than the code. He said Kolivas couldn't be trusted to support his code, and thusly it would never be accepted mainline. Reality was that Kolivas had been responding to criticism and updating his patchset for over 3 years, constantly improving it. In addition to the LKML, he also maintained his own support mailing list.
I'm a Linus fan 95% of the time, but it was a really shitty move, and it drove Kolivas away from contributing. He quit coding for a while. Then after Linus argued for years how this was a bad idea, suddenly the mainline kernel developed the Completely Fair Scheduler overnight, which was very similar to Kolivas' Staircase scheduler. Linus never admitted he had been a dick for years arguing against the thery of the scheduler rewrite. He then pushed the brand new, untested scheduler into mainline.
CFS is better than what we had before, but it still lost in benchmarks to Staircase, and it was new, untested code.
Now, Kolivas came out of retirement with a new scheduler called Brainfuck that is even faster, but he has no intention of ever tryint to get it in the mainline kernel.
Because there is a problem here that Facebook is trying to address. Instead of handing the keys over to Facebook, Google should try to offer up their own solution to the problem.
You don't want to have to check 10 services to see if there are new messages. You want easy, quick and accessible communications.
Wave could be that future. Voice can direct calls to you. It can handle video chat. It can handle a "chat" with multiple people. It can handle IM and quick messages. It can handle email. It can handle attachments, and extensions. It can direct information from waves to outside sources (such as a blog, Picasa, or a SMS server).
Wave already solves this issue.
If Google had marketed Wave better, and integrated it more into their other offerings (like Picasa, YouTube, Android) then it might be exactly what people are looking for.
My phone already provides me with immediate notifications from Facebook, email, IM, text message, etc. No matter how someone tried to contact me, my phone becomes the unified gateway.
Everyone assumed that Facebook would make their own phone, but then the carrier is still the gateway in many ways. Facebook wants to be the communication gateway that everything goes through, and in turn, Facebook then owns all of your private information.
Mind you, Google wants all my data as well, but Google isn't sharing my data with the known world. They just want to automate targetted ads. Facebook actually wants to hand my private data over, which is why they are the absolute last person I want as the gateway for all my communications.
Zuckerberg then went out of his way to recruit the Google developer that was supposedly working on a Facebook killer.
Part of me assumes that he just wanted to know what Google was working on. We know about Wave, Buzz, Google Voice, YouTube, Picasa, and assorted pieces, but I'm sure there was a plan behind the scenes to merge Google's various services into an actual Social Networking site to challenge Facebook. That is why Google got into bed with Zynga after all.
Instead of abandoning Wave, Google should have presented it to all Gmail users to try out. If they rolled it out to every Gmail user as an optional new way to talk to people, then they'd have a large group of users.
Part of me hopes that all this Facebook buzz will make Google consider their decision to abandon Wave.
Except in the era of smartphones and unified address books, if someone tries to send me a message via txt, email, Facebook, IM, whatever, I get the message on my phone.
Facebook wants to the gateway to control all that. I already have a working solution without handing over all my private data to them.
And I already have the capability of sharing my phone number, email address, etc. to friends and family on Facebook.
If people need a unified address to find me, it is my email address. Now, I've long suggested there should be a universal protocol for finding people with IM. Instead of seperate accounts across multiple networks, it should be your email address.
I'm not sure if people remember the Dark Ages before email standards, but the IM networks should unify on a standard, open protocol.
MSN/Live users would still be MSN/Live users. AOL users would still be AOL users. Yahoo users would still be Yahoo users. None of that changes.
Wave was more than collaborative editing. It blurred the line between email and IM.
You had the immediacy of IM, could have multiple people "chatting" at once, and integrated the more powerful features of email (such as attachments, video, pictures, etc). It also was saved for posterity, where as IM threads are somewhat disposable.
Wave provided all these features, and more. Perhaps it was a bit too revolutionary because most people took a quick look at it and had no idea what it was, or how to use it. And if you did want to use it, you didn't know other people who had Wave accounts.
It is called Gmail. And it allows for voice calls and video chat. And it has Buzz integration.
But when Facebook invents it years later, it will be revolutionary and a Gmail killer.
And in truth, Gmail did one-up themselves with Wave, but most people have no idea what it is, so it didn't catch on. The only reason I didn't use Wave is that the people I wanted to talk to didn't have Wave accounts. But Wave really is a brilliant integration of email, IM and more into one.
Sadly, Facebook's solution will be closed, won't allow you to export your contacts (or email) and will have zero privacy. And it will be insanely popular.
I'm not a fan of DRM. It doesn't stop pirates at all, but punishes paying customers.
That being said, 99% of PC games ship with DRM either way. Steam however gives me great sales and digital downloads. So I prefer Steam over the alternatives, such as supporting places like Gamestop which are like pawn shops for kids.
And are you sure gog.com doesn't include any DRM whatsoever? That shocks me. And technically you never own software. You license it.
Actually, that is a common misconception. Cheney never got donations from Halliburton when in office, and they pledged to take any profits from their stock options and donate them to charity.
However, it certainly could be that Cheney took care of his old buddies that he knew in a company he used to work for. But he didn't necessarily directly profit from it.
Is this the same Obama administration that threatened Google with an anti-trust trial and breaking Google up if they landed a search deal with Yahoo, but said they'd allow Microsoft to buy-out Yahoo?
I wouldn't say the administration has been particularly pro-Google.
Then Microsoft swiftly resolved their patent case to resume sales because they are terrified of losing one of their two biggest cash cows. They can not afford to have an injunction against sales.
1 - Microsoft would make so much money suing you that it would be in their best interest to halt all sales of their products in the EU, and pay another half a billion dollar fine. Do you have half a billion dollars that Microsoft can sue you for?
2 - Microsoft would win their court case against you when they worked with the Mono team, and allowed them to license the Mono code GPLv3.
Fact. Microsoft worked directly with the Mono team and gave them their blessing.
Fact. Microsoft made a patent pledge.
Fact. The EU said if Microsoft doesn't play nice on interoperability then they will fine them again and halt all sales of Microsoft products in the EU.
Fact. Several distros and companies have shipped and used Mono software without licensing any patents and nothing bad has happened to any of them.
Fact. Microsoft has sued exactly one company over patents, and that was related to a file system.
Fact. Microsoft has a horrible track record as the company of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish, but in recent years Microsoft has opened documentation on their protocols, and actually released code to the OSS community. Their Chief Software Architect wrote in internal memos that Microsoft needed to change and start embracing open standards and protocols more. In that time frame, IE has shifted significantly to a standards compliant browser, and MS Office voluntarily added a filter for ODF and PDF. Not everything they do is some insidious plan.
Crazy Conspiracy Theory: Anyone who uses Mono will get sued to oblivion, even though it hasn't happened to this point, and it flies in the face of all the evidence to the contrary!
Novell didn't license Mono specifically. They licensed the entire broad patent portfolio of Microsoft.
Given that Microsoft allowed the Mono team to license the Mono code under GPLv3 (given the patent clauses contained therein) and didn't enforce their patents when Ubuntu shipped Mono packages, Microsoft really won't have a case in court.
Slashdot Mirror
Except far fewer features than Google Wave, it is a closed service, and Facebook will own all your private data. But otherwise it is just the same.
Correction.
One company just directs ads to you. They serve the ads directly and they don't hand over your private data.
The other company routinely changes privacy policies every couple months so you don't know they're exposing and selling your data after you repeatedly told them you don't want them doing that.
Or he calmly went back to his near-utopian Google campus and said, "I feel bad for Facebook. They have no idea what we have up our sleeve." And then he spent the rest of the day playing ping pong.
Ingo is a respected member of the kernel community. Of course he will support his code.
But Linus had no real reason to suggest that Con wouldn't support his code after he had already been doing that for 3 years.
My choices are being frisked and groped, or standing in a scanner. Both are unreasonable invasions of my privacy. Taking one over the other isn't really helping the situation.
The solution is to raise awareness until the government is willing to change, which is why I posted links to the Opt Out site on my Twitter and Facebook.
Heck, we have them in Omaha, which is a rather small airport.
Every flight I've had recently has had them, and I've had to go through them.
I think part of the reason that Linus is more accepting of this change rather than replacing the entire scheduler (like Con Kolivas pushed for) is that Linus likes small, neat patches. And I think Linus gets offended when someone wants to rip out large sections of the kernel and replace them.
I often wonder how much old, legacy code there is in the kernel that is just overlooked. Anytime you carry code for that many years, you're bound to have some legacy systems that can due to be replaced.
Kernel benchmarks are always a point of contention. But interbench and all the standard benchmarks did show a marked improvement with the CK patchset and the Staircase scheduler.
If Linus didn't really believe it was an improvement, then why did he eventually call on Ingo to write a very similar scheduler?
Linus didn't want to admit he was a jerk who made a flippant personal decision rather than focusing on the best code.
Occassionally, yes. But usually when Linus flames someone on the LKML he is entertaining, and is right. This was an instance where Linus just seemed to be a dick for no reason.
Con Kolivas worked on his staircase scheduler and various performance patches for years. They were routinely demonstrated to be a major improvement. Linus kept saying he was concerned the tradeoff of desktop performance would come in other environments, even though that wasn't true.
Since benchmark after benchmark showed staircase was vastly superior to what was in mainline, Linus then went to go after the guy rather than the code. He said Kolivas couldn't be trusted to support his code, and thusly it would never be accepted mainline. Reality was that Kolivas had been responding to criticism and updating his patchset for over 3 years, constantly improving it. In addition to the LKML, he also maintained his own support mailing list.
I'm a Linus fan 95% of the time, but it was a really shitty move, and it drove Kolivas away from contributing. He quit coding for a while. Then after Linus argued for years how this was a bad idea, suddenly the mainline kernel developed the Completely Fair Scheduler overnight, which was very similar to Kolivas' Staircase scheduler. Linus never admitted he had been a dick for years arguing against the thery of the scheduler rewrite. He then pushed the brand new, untested scheduler into mainline.
CFS is better than what we had before, but it still lost in benchmarks to Staircase, and it was new, untested code.
Now, Kolivas came out of retirement with a new scheduler called Brainfuck that is even faster, but he has no intention of ever tryint to get it in the mainline kernel.
Because there is a problem here that Facebook is trying to address. Instead of handing the keys over to Facebook, Google should try to offer up their own solution to the problem.
You don't want to have to check 10 services to see if there are new messages. You want easy, quick and accessible communications.
Wave could be that future. Voice can direct calls to you. It can handle video chat. It can handle a "chat" with multiple people. It can handle IM and quick messages. It can handle email. It can handle attachments, and extensions. It can direct information from waves to outside sources (such as a blog, Picasa, or a SMS server).
Wave already solves this issue.
If Google had marketed Wave better, and integrated it more into their other offerings (like Picasa, YouTube, Android) then it might be exactly what people are looking for.
My phone already provides me with immediate notifications from Facebook, email, IM, text message, etc. No matter how someone tried to contact me, my phone becomes the unified gateway.
Everyone assumed that Facebook would make their own phone, but then the carrier is still the gateway in many ways. Facebook wants to be the communication gateway that everything goes through, and in turn, Facebook then owns all of your private information.
Mind you, Google wants all my data as well, but Google isn't sharing my data with the known world. They just want to automate targetted ads. Facebook actually wants to hand my private data over, which is why they are the absolute last person I want as the gateway for all my communications.
Zuckerberg then went out of his way to recruit the Google developer that was supposedly working on a Facebook killer.
Part of me assumes that he just wanted to know what Google was working on. We know about Wave, Buzz, Google Voice, YouTube, Picasa, and assorted pieces, but I'm sure there was a plan behind the scenes to merge Google's various services into an actual Social Networking site to challenge Facebook. That is why Google got into bed with Zynga after all.
Instead of abandoning Wave, Google should have presented it to all Gmail users to try out. If they rolled it out to every Gmail user as an optional new way to talk to people, then they'd have a large group of users.
Part of me hopes that all this Facebook buzz will make Google consider their decision to abandon Wave.
Except in the era of smartphones and unified address books, if someone tries to send me a message via txt, email, Facebook, IM, whatever, I get the message on my phone.
Facebook wants to the gateway to control all that. I already have a working solution without handing over all my private data to them.
And I already have the capability of sharing my phone number, email address, etc. to friends and family on Facebook.
If people need a unified address to find me, it is my email address. Now, I've long suggested there should be a universal protocol for finding people with IM. Instead of seperate accounts across multiple networks, it should be your email address.
I'm not sure if people remember the Dark Ages before email standards, but the IM networks should unify on a standard, open protocol.
MSN/Live users would still be MSN/Live users. AOL users would still be AOL users. Yahoo users would still be Yahoo users. None of that changes.
Wave was more than collaborative editing. It blurred the line between email and IM.
You had the immediacy of IM, could have multiple people "chatting" at once, and integrated the more powerful features of email (such as attachments, video, pictures, etc). It also was saved for posterity, where as IM threads are somewhat disposable.
Wave provided all these features, and more. Perhaps it was a bit too revolutionary because most people took a quick look at it and had no idea what it was, or how to use it. And if you did want to use it, you didn't know other people who had Wave accounts.
It is called Gmail. And it allows for voice calls and video chat. And it has Buzz integration.
But when Facebook invents it years later, it will be revolutionary and a Gmail killer.
And in truth, Gmail did one-up themselves with Wave, but most people have no idea what it is, so it didn't catch on. The only reason I didn't use Wave is that the people I wanted to talk to didn't have Wave accounts. But Wave really is a brilliant integration of email, IM and more into one.
Sadly, Facebook's solution will be closed, won't allow you to export your contacts (or email) and will have zero privacy. And it will be insanely popular.
http://xkcd.com/473/
I'm not a fan of DRM. It doesn't stop pirates at all, but punishes paying customers.
That being said, 99% of PC games ship with DRM either way. Steam however gives me great sales and digital downloads. So I prefer Steam over the alternatives, such as supporting places like Gamestop which are like pawn shops for kids.
And are you sure gog.com doesn't include any DRM whatsoever? That shocks me. And technically you never own software. You license it.
http://www.factcheck.org/kerry_ad_falsely_accuses_cheney_on_halliburton.html
Actually, that is a common misconception. Cheney never got donations from Halliburton when in office, and they pledged to take any profits from their stock options and donate them to charity.
However, it certainly could be that Cheney took care of his old buddies that he knew in a company he used to work for. But he didn't necessarily directly profit from it.
Is this the same Obama administration that threatened Google with an anti-trust trial and breaking Google up if they landed a search deal with Yahoo, but said they'd allow Microsoft to buy-out Yahoo?
I wouldn't say the administration has been particularly pro-Google.
http://news.cnet.com/2100-1014_3-5255715.html
Microsoft did pay the EU fines.
And MS Office sales were halted. The judge upheld the injunction, not stopped it.
http://techie-buzz.com/microsoft/injunction-on-sale-of-microsoft-office-2007-word-2007-in-the-us-post-jan-11-2010-upheld.html
Then Microsoft swiftly resolved their patent case to resume sales because they are terrified of losing one of their two biggest cash cows. They can not afford to have an injunction against sales.
Please stop lying and spreading FUD.
Your scenario depends on two things.
1 - Microsoft would make so much money suing you that it would be in their best interest to halt all sales of their products in the EU, and pay another half a billion dollar fine. Do you have half a billion dollars that Microsoft can sue you for?
2 - Microsoft would win their court case against you when they worked with the Mono team, and allowed them to license the Mono code GPLv3.
http://www.fsfe.org/projects/gplv3/patents-and-gplv3.en.html
Fact. Microsoft worked directly with the Mono team and gave them their blessing.
Fact. Microsoft made a patent pledge.
Fact. The EU said if Microsoft doesn't play nice on interoperability then they will fine them again and halt all sales of Microsoft products in the EU.
Fact. Several distros and companies have shipped and used Mono software without licensing any patents and nothing bad has happened to any of them.
Fact. Microsoft has sued exactly one company over patents, and that was related to a file system.
Fact. Microsoft has a horrible track record as the company of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish, but in recent years Microsoft has opened documentation on their protocols, and actually released code to the OSS community. Their Chief Software Architect wrote in internal memos that Microsoft needed to change and start embracing open standards and protocols more. In that time frame, IE has shifted significantly to a standards compliant browser, and MS Office voluntarily added a filter for ODF and PDF. Not everything they do is some insidious plan.
Crazy Conspiracy Theory: Anyone who uses Mono will get sued to oblivion, even though it hasn't happened to this point, and it flies in the face of all the evidence to the contrary!
Yes, you are spreading FUD. Again, stop it.
Novell didn't license Mono specifically. They licensed the entire broad patent portfolio of Microsoft.
Given that Microsoft allowed the Mono team to license the Mono code under GPLv3 (given the patent clauses contained therein) and didn't enforce their patents when Ubuntu shipped Mono packages, Microsoft really won't have a case in court.
Stop spreading FUD.