So I have an idea that could possibly work? What if we could give an incentive to the ad networks to honor it?
The gist is Adblock/etc, band up and agree that they will by default only block networks that do not adhere to DNT (this would be the default option on first install, users who want more can change this option to say "everything"). By doing this, adnetworks who do follow DNT will rach a tiny (but growing) surge of users they would not otherwise. Not to mention some good karma.
You make an interesting point. I'm guessing the fineprint when you signed up said you handover "non-exclusive, worldwide royalty free" permission to/. to use as they please (or suchlike).
So essentially this is the only copy of you work, and you already have one licensee to it. But you cannot get rid of this work, and you cannot unlicense it.
All it takes is a couple high profile sites to recognise this header. Something along the lines of "Hey, we see you requested DO-Not-track, and we'll honor this" . Once this feature and it's usage is in the average user's radar, it creates an incentive for the website to garner some karma. And as the web grows focuses more on privacy issues, this would very likely lead to content providers and advertisers honoring the header. I'd be interested in seeing how Mozilla and others promote this.
Chrome privacy window is of a different color. When you regularly use it, you immediately know when you're in privacy mode by the color. It's intuitive, and in no way confusing when you're used to it.
The best methodology would obviously be a blind test. divide a page into two, and present a set with 10 pairs of {Link, blurb} on both sides. Randomly assign which side Google/Bing is shown. Ask the user to try searches, and rate which he/she thinks was a better search.
If the formatting is the exact same, and no engine specific keywords (inurl, date range etc) are allowed, running this test on the internet for a couple days would give an unbiased estimate of search prowess. Something I've pondered about for a while..
If the students are going to slack off, they were never interested in what was going on. Simply ask that those not interested may not intermingle in anyway with others to disturb the others' concentration. Or better yet, leave the class.
Those who are interested would use laptops to their advantage, be it for reference, quick search, etc.
Interesting theory if you buy the premise that random X and Y chromosomes are on average more different than two random X chromosomes, and thus lead to a larger degree of mutations.
Can someone with some knowledge in genetics/related fields comment.
.. I have very little actual confidence in zfs and support..
ZFS as it is today, even without any further feature additions, is miles ahead of any other FOSS filesystem in features and stability. As far as support goes, there is enough community and kernel expertize outside Oracle to atleast maintain the code (my employer Nexenta has made code contributions back into ZFS : the in-kernel iscsi code). So there is no reason for the doom and gloom.. that's the beauty of FOSS, you cant take back what you've provided.
I'm one of the NCP guys, and currently at Debconf. I'm hoping to engage the community about this. We'll have updates posted to the project on where NCP4 is headed soon.
We've opened the closed bits of libc - specifically the i18n portion of it.
What's still closed (and soon to be opened) is some additional drivers (mpt, etc) that are almost prepared to be released. All of the closed bits would be open in a short timeframe (weeks).
What you've quoted Garrett saying is in reference to OpenSolaris's code. That is followed by the announcement that we've opened it.
/me wonders how long before someone on opensolaris-discuss posts this in a thread, leading to another flamewar and a new round of speculations on the nature of OpenSolaris;)
Though a fork (in the sense of OpenBSD/FreeBSD) is not possible, a fork in the sense of Linus's tree, and Alan Cox's tree is possible. The Nexenta project itself already maintains such a tree (nexenta-gate) for the Nexenta and derivative distributions.
In short, though Oracle develops a major part of the kernel, it's open source nature still allows for multiple paths the community can take. The healthy Nexenta community is a testament to that.
We do have some plans for OpenSolaris in the near future. If you're attending DebConf in the first week of August, look me up (and my talk).
Science is not faith! Science is a methodology leading to statements that can be proven or disproven. Faith (as in religious faith) is "Here's some truths".
interpreting someone else's work by using my common experience.
Yeah. Except that's all you can do with religion, as opposed to science.
To call science faith is disingenuous at best, and blatantly dishonent at worst..
Slashdot Mirror
So I have an idea that could possibly work? What if we could give an incentive to the ad networks to honor it?
The gist is Adblock/etc, band up and agree that they will by default only block networks that do not adhere to DNT (this would be the default option on first install, users who want more can change this option to say "everything"). By doing this, adnetworks who do follow DNT will rach a tiny (but growing) surge of users they would not otherwise. Not to mention some good karma.
You make an interesting point. I'm guessing the fineprint when you signed up said you handover "non-exclusive, worldwide royalty free" permission to /. to use as they please (or suchlike).
So essentially this is the only copy of you work, and you already have one licensee to it. But you cannot get rid of this work, and you cannot unlicense it.
Ha.. by that metric.
Windows sucks - 29,500,000 results (0.12 seconds)
Mac sucks - 22,600,000 results (0.12 seconds)
Ruby codez sucks - 2,740,000 results (0.24 seconds)
Back to the troll machine, boy..
Just sayin'
And if they choose to ignore it?
All it takes is a couple high profile sites to recognise this header. Something along the lines of "Hey, we see you requested DO-Not-track, and we'll honor this" . Once this feature and it's usage is in the average user's radar, it creates an incentive for the website to garner some karma. And as the web grows focuses more on privacy issues, this would very likely lead to content providers and advertisers honoring the header. I'd be interested in seeing how Mozilla and others promote this.
Chrome privacy window is of a different color. When you regularly use it, you immediately know when you're in privacy mode by the color. It's intuitive, and in no way confusing when you're used to it.
The best methodology would obviously be a blind test. divide a page into two, and present a set with 10 pairs of {Link, blurb} on both sides. Randomly assign which side Google/Bing is shown. Ask the user to try searches, and rate which he/she thinks was a better search.
If the formatting is the exact same, and no engine specific keywords (inurl, date range etc) are allowed, running this test on the internet for a couple days would give an unbiased estimate of search prowess. Something I've pondered about for a while..
If the students are going to slack off, they were never interested in what was going on. Simply ask that those not interested may not intermingle in anyway with others to disturb the others' concentration. Or better yet, leave the class.
Those who are interested would use laptops to their advantage, be it for reference, quick search, etc.
Interesting theory if you buy the premise that random X and Y chromosomes are on average more different than two random X chromosomes, and thus lead to a larger degree of mutations.
Can someone with some knowledge in genetics/related fields comment.
but someone got to actually run those servers also
Dont volunteer.. the servers will come down NOW!!
.. I have very little actual confidence in zfs and support ..
ZFS as it is today, even without any further feature additions, is miles ahead of any other FOSS filesystem in features and stability. As far as support goes, there is enough community and kernel expertize outside Oracle to atleast maintain the code (my employer Nexenta has made code contributions back into ZFS : the in-kernel iscsi code). So there is no reason for the doom and gloom.. that's the beauty of FOSS, you cant take back what you've provided.
~Anil
Nexenta, and I believe Illuminos, use apt.
Nexenta uses apt. Illumos as yet is packaging independent. It's chosen by downstream distributions.
ouch! I was going for funny :(
Streiiständt üffect
I'm one of the NCP guys, and currently at Debconf. I'm hoping to engage the community about this. We'll have updates posted to the project on where NCP4 is headed soon.
The referenced OpenSolaris is not the code, but the distribution OpenSolaris (formerly project Indiana).
The most important bit (libc_i18n) is opened. The rest is in the process, and will be pushed into the repo in very short time.
(I'm in the project leadership team of Illumos)
We've opened the closed bits of libc - specifically the i18n portion of it.
What's still closed (and soon to be opened) is some additional drivers (mpt, etc) that are almost prepared to be released. All of the closed bits would be open in a short timeframe (weeks).
What you've quoted Garrett saying is in reference to OpenSolaris's code. That is followed by the announcement that we've opened it.
~Anil
Mike Arrington from techcrunch has an opposing take on the handshake
http://techcrunch.com/2009/05/09/hand-shaking-is-so-medieval-lets-end-it/
/me wonders how long before someone on opensolaris-discuss posts this in a thread, leading to another flamewar and a new round of speculations on the nature of OpenSolaris ;)
Though a fork (in the sense of OpenBSD/FreeBSD) is not possible, a fork in the sense of Linus's tree, and Alan Cox's tree is possible. The Nexenta project itself already maintains such a tree (nexenta-gate) for the Nexenta and derivative distributions.
In short, though Oracle develops a major part of the kernel, it's open source nature still allows for multiple paths the community can take. The healthy Nexenta community is a testament to that.
We do have some plans for OpenSolaris in the near future. If you're attending DebConf in the first week of August, look me up (and my talk).
This story reminded me of the excellent Onion piece on Bush Jr.'s work in fermilab.
http://www.theonion.com/articles/bush-finds-error-in-fermilab-calculations,1463/
I's be interested in knowing your criticism of science. As far as I've looked it's a perfect system of exploring the universe.
(perhaps you meant critical of pseudoscience, but that isnt really science.)
Science is not faith! Science is a methodology leading to statements that can be proven or disproven. Faith (as in religious faith) is "Here's some truths".
interpreting someone else's work by using my common experience.
Yeah. Except that's all you can do with religion, as opposed to science.
To call science faith is disingenuous at best, and blatantly dishonent at worst..
Nexenta is FOSS, and provides upsates.
There's a derivative targeted as a storage appliance.
http://www.nexentastor.org/projects/site/wiki/Tour
IAA Nexenta dev.
http://www.nexentastor.org/projects/site/wiki/Tour
NexentaStor is built on Nexenta specifically as a storage appliance. You can configure various ZFSsy things via the browser.
(IAA Nexenta Dev)