I understand that perfectly, but the application separation may have some unknown side-effects. I think that is why they are going safe with 0.1. They don't want to say it is 1.0 version until a lot of people tested it and isolated any wild bugs.
So, I will a while. Mozilla is now my only browser/email application. I can't take the risk (at least not with email - browsers are not so critical).
But now you add the network variable into the equation. All will be fine until you have time constraints to deal with. Those may kill you in a bad day. Besides, you are restricted to connected users. For desktop stand-alone applications it is an unnecessary burden on the end-user.
You're certain to go down pretty fast, but that was the first funny (and almost on topic) first post I've seem in eons. Nice "quick thinking" skills too.:))
I've got two years of mail in my.mozilla folder and I don't intend to hack together some sick bastardized transfer.
A version 0.1 is not something you trust valuable data with. Never. If you really want to test it, backup you email and put it safely away, preferably in another non-connected physical machine where the new software can't have a chance to find it. Read again the version number: 0.1. Even running smothly this is the sort of version that eats your real mail, misfilters all the spam and trash your disk on the side.
Today you go to one site and download a Mozilla 1.4 installation. Tomorrow you will go to one site and download either only what you want or an "everything" installer. What's the difference, short of a saner development tree?
You misunderstand me (not for the first time today, I notice), I was not talking about client-side issues. The problem is, not all companies use the same system. We're a small but fancy development shop. If the client wants our systems to run under Windows, they will. If the client wants them under Unix, there they will be. It is fine to build in ASP.NET if you can be absolutely sure your system won't have to run on anythng but Windows. I don't have this luxury. Time proved us that a cross-platform language and infra-structure would give us more market penetration. We're still alive and kicking after all these years.
If you were not there to see the evidence with your own eyes during the dotcom crazy you missed a nice trip. Kids would start their sites in Windows 98 home machines, grow it to NT servers with the money that feel from the sky every even day and eventually notice they would need a farm of those or a Solaris box. So the CEO kid would buy the Solaris box and tell the devs: "Put our site here over the weekend, will you?".
I couldn't care less for a Windows-only ratified standard. It is not religious if my company's survival depends on us being able to run our software anywhere the client wants.
And by the way, you may say Java is "closed" language. Python, on the other hand, has a nice, open development process, much like Perl. And please explain to me what the hell a ratified language is worthif it runs only on a platform that may change when one company's business plan changes (and again, if you were not there to see when Microsoft did exactly this many times before, you missed a very bad but enlightning trip)? This time next year Balmer may announce that the new world direction is the Palladium platform and that C# will be replaced by the new (ractified standard language) DCubed - you may upgrade you VS.NET to VS Pal for just 200 hundred dollars...
My point is not, as I posted in another answer, being able to port my company's "mission-critical-do not-touch-we-die-if-breaks" system at will. My point is being able to offer services in many platforms. A code once run anywhere type of thing. That without even touching the "wild CEO" problem as in "John, I decided to buy Solaris this year - care to port those web apps for me? It would be fine to have then by Monday for a demo in the board meeting..."
If stop thinking "whole systems" and start thinking "components", the opportunities become endless. Within any given large company you will usually have different systems running (within any given small to medium company you will eventually different systems) and by "going portable" you will be able to offer new services where previously there were none. Objected oriented programming sometimes works exactly as our mothers said it should...
Correct spelling in Slashdot? You gotta be kidding, they would revoke by club membership.
(I hope it is obvious I just thought it was too small a comment for me to need preview - the most common fatal error. But I haven't started anything with "end". What do you think the two "..." mean?)
It must resist all attachs, and then some
on
Tim O'Reilly Interview
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
It doesn't have to resist every attach Bruce Schnier can conceive of
But it does, or else it won't keep consumer behavior in check. It is enough for one Chinese hacker or one Bulgarian hobbist to break the protection once, the networks do the rest: in the wonderful digital world we live in, once broken, forever broken, everywhere. I can't replicate a shoplifting, but I can program a code-breaking software that will break a given protection everytime.The whole point is that Joe Clueless Consumer does not have to be a crypto expert, just a Web amateur capable o downloading the "codec" that will play everything again. And Joe C. Consumer will...
You are right, obviously. That is one of things platforms like Tomcat, Zope and.NET do for you: they give you an environment where you can mantain information about a client in-between requests.
I find Java in the server specially productive, since I can use the whole library with very little concern for the web-specific code in the front (ie, I can easily isolate the view from the model and the controller). The same goes for Zope (with a little more work). But I agree that Perl and CPAN may also be good. It would depend on you previous experience and particular preference.
To use your own words, why don't you come back and post when you have a clue?
If you "don't program in Java or C#", refrain from talking from the top of your head about something you can't know.
And "all this platform compatibility is a moot point" only in your dreams. Java is far from perfect but its cross-platform enough to make it a far superior platform for web and network development in general. Only the very young and inexperient amateurs mock the importance of being able to choose any system running on any hardware for you applications.
You should always write web application using a platform that allows you to use the same infra-structure you use for desktop application. Besides the learning curve problem, it also helps when you wnat to mix them both ("weblize" a destop app, for instance).
That said, ASP and VB.NET are not the answer. Using non-portable languages to write web apps is a very bad idea.
It would take me months to write a C/C++ cgi app
Where are you from, 1994? If you really need unmantainable spagetthi like ASP, you can use PHP (portable across all known platforms), but you have Java (Tomcat) and Python (Zope) that allow you to use very high-level structures with a higher productivity (in my experience) than any Windows-only solution. No one writes C cgis anymore...
You may have methodological problems with their approach, but it works. Simple approaches are not fundamentally bad, specially simple approaches no one has tried before. From the small amount of information available, it looks like a very promissing path once you have enough storage and processing power. Guess what, we now have both at consumer level prices. So why not try the "dumb" method? Specially if it works better than all other methods available.
...who was once as tall and handsome as you and now lies vegetating in bed, kept alive by machines.
One must take such (all?) statistics with a large sack of salt, specially if the method is not disclosed. Pendind this, I would offer an interpretation: an official declaration that the patient's brain is dead is only necessary if the person is a donor and if this fact is relevant.
If you are in a hospital that is not an active transplant center and there is no safe way available to keep your organs usable and to move them to a place where a transplant can be carried out, there is little point in declaring you brain-dead. You will die of "multiple organ failure" soon enough.
As for non-donors, it is common for the family to insist on keeping the a brain-dead patient "technically" alive until they manage to convince themselves that the person won't come back. And again, the cause of death will be respiratory or heart failure, after the machines are turned off.
In both cases, the brain-death declaration is not necessary, so why would the doctors bother to state it?
Even without taking spam (which you obviously see during the email-writing/reading time) into account, Eudora has been using its client as an advertising medium for a long time. You choose among the crippled "Light" Edition, the full-featured paid Edition or the full-featured Sponsored Edition. The later has small dinamic adds (just like banners) that are active all the time and exchange information with a host when you are online.
Microsoft should already have noticed it - Outlook would be a wonderful platform for this, given its far larger userbase.
My point is that depending on the country you are on, they will bark but be unable to bite. Laws and interpretations vary wildly and even international treaties leave some breaches for local adaptations.
It was not clear for me if the foreign server you mention was in the US (since you say you are not in the US). If it was they can reach you. If it wasn't it depends. Maybe if you ignored the deCSS cease and desist letter it would end there (obviously they could always try to break you finnancially, by trying to sue you anyway).
I have no doubt the disconnection of the Americans would be dramatic. Specially because most of them don't care about Brazilian or German music as much as most Brazilians and Germans care about Britney.
On the other hand, it would be a great opportunity for everybody to discover Asian (Japanese, Chinse, Korean) music and movies. And we are talking about a temporary measure: even RIAA can't keep it forever.
It is funny, the situation you describe about Germany is very similar to Brazil. The ammount of commercial piracy here is enormous. The music industry's larger illegal competitors are not the P2P networks but the professional street K7 tape salesman.
In a time where kids are convinced that oral sex is not sex, email not being seem as online is no surprise. The Internet is what you see in IE, isn't it?
Americans were the majority for a long time. I guess I haven't looked at the numbers for a long time. And as you point, theyr are still the largest group by far (the second country in the list is Japan with less than a third of the American users).
So, no need to be harsh. It was just a mistake, and one that doesn't even make the argument in the comment invalid, quite the contrary. The more users worldwide, the less the networks depend on RIAA subjects.
The last "A" is RIAA stands for America. While the Americans are still the majority of the Internet users, it is changing quickly as more and more contries get their telecom act together.
RIAA can't subpoena Chinese, French or Russian users. And it is not even very clear if RIAA's sister organisations in their respective countries can, because laws are different over there (remember Sklyarov and how PDF encryption breaking is legal in Russia?).
So, I guess Americans can safely disable their shares and let the world feed the networks for a while. When RIAA comes to town in Australia, for instance, we do it the other way around.
Slashdot Mirror
I understand that perfectly, but the application separation may have some unknown side-effects. I think that is why they are going safe with 0.1. They don't want to say it is 1.0 version until a lot of people tested it and isolated any wild bugs.
So, I will a while. Mozilla is now my only browser/email application. I can't take the risk (at least not with email - browsers are not so critical).
But now you add the network variable into the equation. All will be fine until you have time constraints to deal with. Those may kill you in a bad day. Besides, you are restricted to connected users. For desktop stand-alone applications it is an unnecessary burden on the end-user.
You're certain to go down pretty fast, but that was the first funny (and almost on topic) first post I've seem in eons. Nice "quick thinking" skills too. :))
I've got two years of mail in my .mozilla folder and I don't intend to hack together some sick bastardized transfer.
A version 0.1 is not something you trust valuable data with. Never. If you really want to test it, backup you email and put it safely away, preferably in another non-connected physical machine where the new software can't have a chance to find it. Read again the version number: 0.1. Even running smothly this is the sort of version that eats your real mail, misfilters all the spam and trash your disk on the side.
Today you go to one site and download a Mozilla 1.4 installation. Tomorrow you will go to one site and download either only what you want or an "everything" installer. What's the difference, short of a saner development tree?
You misunderstand me (not for the first time today, I notice), I was not talking about client-side issues. The problem is, not all companies use the same system. We're a small but fancy development shop. If the client wants our systems to run under Windows, they will. If the client wants them under Unix, there they will be. It is fine to build in ASP.NET if you can be absolutely sure your system won't have to run on anythng but Windows. I don't have this luxury. Time proved us that a cross-platform language and infra-structure would give us more market penetration. We're still alive and kicking after all these years.
If you were not there to see the evidence with your own eyes during the dotcom crazy you missed a nice trip. Kids would start their sites in Windows 98 home machines, grow it to NT servers with the money that feel from the sky every even day and eventually notice they would need a farm of those or a Solaris box. So the CEO kid would buy the Solaris box and tell the devs: "Put our site here over the weekend, will you?".
.NET to VS Pal for just 200 hundred dollars...
I couldn't care less for a Windows-only ratified standard. It is not religious if my company's survival depends on us being able to run our software anywhere the client wants.
And by the way, you may say Java is "closed" language. Python, on the other hand, has a nice, open development process, much like Perl. And please explain to me what the hell a ratified language is worthif it runs only on a platform that may change when one company's business plan changes (and again, if you were not there to see when Microsoft did exactly this many times before, you missed a very bad but enlightning trip)? This time next year Balmer may announce that the new world direction is the Palladium platform and that C# will be replaced by the new (ractified standard language) DCubed - you may upgrade you VS
There is an immense commercial piracy business with money to R&D these things. And their livinghood depends on it...
My point is not, as I posted in another answer, being able to port my company's "mission-critical-do not-touch-we-die-if-breaks" system at will. My point is being able to offer services in many platforms. A code once run anywhere type of thing. That without even touching the "wild CEO" problem as in "John, I decided to buy Solaris this year - care to port those web apps for me? It would be fine to have then by Monday for a demo in the board meeting..."
If stop thinking "whole systems" and start thinking "components", the opportunities become endless. Within any given large company you will usually have different systems running (within any given small to medium company you will eventually different systems) and by "going portable" you will be able to offer new services where previously there were none. Objected oriented programming sometimes works exactly as our mothers said it should...
Correct spelling in Slashdot? You gotta be kidding, they would revoke by club membership.
(I hope it is obvious I just thought it was too small a comment for me to need preview - the most common fatal error. But I haven't started anything with "end". What do you think the two "..." mean?)
It doesn't have to resist every attach Bruce Schnier can conceive of
But it does, or else it won't keep consumer behavior in check. It is enough for one Chinese hacker or one Bulgarian hobbist to break the protection once, the networks do the rest: in the wonderful digital world we live in, once broken, forever broken, everywhere. I can't replicate a shoplifting, but I can program a code-breaking software that will break a given protection everytime.The whole point is that Joe Clueless Consumer does not have to be a crypto expert, just a Web amateur capable o downloading the "codec" that will play everything again. And Joe C. Consumer will...
You are right, obviously. That is one of things platforms like Tomcat, Zope and .NET do for you: they give you an environment where you can mantain information about a client in-between requests.
I find Java in the server specially productive, since I can use the whole library with very little concern for the web-specific code in the front (ie, I can easily isolate the view from the model and the controller). The same goes for Zope (with a little more work). But I agree that Perl and CPAN may also be good. It would depend on you previous experience and particular preference.
To use your own words, why don't you come back and post when you have a clue?
If you "don't program in Java or C#", refrain from talking from the top of your head about something you can't know.
And "all this platform compatibility is a moot point" only in your dreams. Java is far from perfect but its cross-platform enough to make it a far superior platform for web and network development in general. Only the very young and inexperient amateurs mock the importance of being able to choose any system running on any hardware for you applications.
You should always write web application using a platform that allows you to use the same infra-structure you use for desktop application. Besides the learning curve problem, it also helps when you wnat to mix them both ("weblize" a destop app, for instance).
That said, ASP and VB.NET are not the answer. Using non-portable languages to write web apps is a very bad idea.
It would take me months to write a C/C++ cgi app
Where are you from, 1994? If you really need unmantainable spagetthi like ASP, you can use PHP (portable across all known platforms), but you have Java (Tomcat) and Python (Zope) that allow you to use very high-level structures with a higher productivity (in my experience) than any Windows-only solution. No one writes C cgis anymore...
You may have methodological problems with their approach, but it works. Simple approaches are not fundamentally bad, specially simple approaches no one has tried before. From the small amount of information available, it looks like a very promissing path once you have enough storage and processing power. Guess what, we now have both at consumer level prices. So why not try the "dumb" method? Specially if it works better than all other methods available.
...and I will make pseudo-insightful comments based on the headline text without reading any of the source articles, until my karma is excellent?
...who was once as tall and handsome as you and now lies vegetating in bed, kept alive by machines.
One must take such (all?) statistics with a large sack of salt, specially if the method is not disclosed. Pendind this, I would offer an interpretation: an official declaration that the patient's brain is dead is only necessary if the person is a donor and if this fact is relevant.
If you are in a hospital that is not an active transplant center and there is no safe way available to keep your organs usable and to move them to a place where a transplant can be carried out, there is little point in declaring you brain-dead. You will die of "multiple organ failure" soon enough.
As for non-donors, it is common for the family to insist on keeping the a brain-dead patient "technically" alive until they manage to convince themselves that the person won't come back. And again, the cause of death will be respiratory or heart failure, after the machines are turned off.
In both cases, the brain-death declaration is not necessary, so why would the doctors bother to state it?
IPv6 a nano-dime a dozen...
Even without taking spam (which you obviously see during the email-writing/reading time) into account, Eudora has been using its client as an advertising medium for a long time. You choose among the crippled "Light" Edition, the full-featured paid Edition or the full-featured Sponsored Edition. The later has small dinamic adds (just like banners) that are active all the time and exchange information with a host when you are online.
Microsoft should already have noticed it - Outlook would be a wonderful platform for this, given its far larger userbase.
My point is that depending on the country you are on, they will bark but be unable to bite. Laws and interpretations vary wildly and even international treaties leave some breaches for local adaptations.
It was not clear for me if the foreign server you mention was in the US (since you say you are not in the US). If it was they can reach you. If it wasn't it depends. Maybe if you ignored the deCSS cease and desist letter it would end there (obviously they could always try to break you finnancially, by trying to sue you anyway).
I have no doubt the disconnection of the Americans would be dramatic. Specially because most of them don't care about Brazilian or German music as much as most Brazilians and Germans care about Britney.
On the other hand, it would be a great opportunity for everybody to discover Asian (Japanese, Chinse, Korean) music and movies. And we are talking about a temporary measure: even RIAA can't keep it forever.
It is funny, the situation you describe about Germany is very similar to Brazil. The ammount of commercial piracy here is enormous. The music industry's larger illegal competitors are not the P2P networks but the professional street K7 tape salesman.
In a time where kids are convinced that oral sex is not sex, email not being seem as online is no surprise. The Internet is what you see in IE, isn't it?
Americans were the majority for a long time. I guess I haven't looked at the numbers for a long time. And as you point, theyr are still the largest group by far (the second country in the list is Japan with less than a third of the American users).
So, no need to be harsh. It was just a mistake, and one that doesn't even make the argument in the comment invalid, quite the contrary. The more users worldwide, the less the networks depend on RIAA subjects.
The last "A" is RIAA stands for America. While the Americans are still the majority of the Internet users, it is changing quickly as more and more contries get their telecom act together.
RIAA can't subpoena Chinese, French or Russian users. And it is not even very clear if RIAA's sister organisations in their respective countries can, because laws are different over there (remember Sklyarov and how PDF encryption breaking is legal in Russia?).
So, I guess Americans can safely disable their shares and let the world feed the networks for a while. When RIAA comes to town in Australia, for instance, we do it the other way around.